Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Author Archives: Gerald Barnett
When to disclose inventions? Part II: Bayh-Dole, 2
We are explaining why, despite widespread insistence by folks who set themselves up as experts, there’s no obligation in Bayh-Dole for inventors to disclose inventions made under a federal contract. The first point to be made is that if one … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged Bayh-Dole, disclosure, Federal Procurement Regulations, monsterpiece, NISTwit
Comments Off on When to disclose inventions? Part II: Bayh-Dole, 2
When to disclose inventions? Part II: Bayh-Dole, 1
When to disclose a subject invention under Bayh-Dole? It doesn’t matter. Really. Let me explain. The Bayh-Dole Act applies to subject inventions. A subject invention is an invention (i) owned by a contractor (ii) that is or may be patentable … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged Bayh-Dole, disclosure
Comments Off on When to disclose inventions? Part II: Bayh-Dole, 1
A century of reaping enormous profits at the expense of sickness and misfortune, 3
The Mayo doctors, having made their specific arguments with regard to salvarsan in their 1917 letter to Congress, end with a full scale plea, not only to cancel the patent for salvarsan but also for other German drugs, and for … Continue reading
A century of reaping enormous profits at the expense of sickness and misfortune, 2
Mayo’s research publication Discovery’s Edge recently ran an article on “The Power of Patents.” In the article, Mayo Clinic wonders about patent royalties from a famous past invention: When Mayo Clinic colleagues Edward Kendall, Ph.D., and Philip Hench, M.D., along with … Continue reading
Posted in History, Policy
Tagged crowd source, monopoly meme, patents, research
Comments Off on A century of reaping enormous profits at the expense of sickness and misfortune, 2
A century of reaping enormous profits at the expense of sickness and misfortune, 1
In June 1917, the United States had just entered the first world war against Germany, and a German chemical maker through its American subsidiary Farbwerke-Hoechst held U.S. patents on salvarsan, a medicine used to treat syphilis. Along letters written on … Continue reading
“Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 4
In arguing in Public Citizen v NIH that secret exclusive deals were the only way the NIH could fulfill its public mission–or at least the mission of its patent licensing office–the NIH produced some interesting metrics. In 2000, the NIH … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged Bayh-Dole, disclosure, exclusive license, fat, misery, NIH, promote, Public Citizen
Comments Off on “Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 4
“Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 3
We are working through the Public Citizen v NIH case. Public Citizen sought to make the NIH disclose key elements of its exclusive licensing practice, and NIH refused. The Court agreed with the NIH–that in the balance between public interest … Continue reading
“Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 2
The meaning of “promote” in Bayh-Dole gets dealt with, though indirectly, in Public Citizen v. NIH (2002). In this case, Public Citizen, an advocacy group, sued the NIH in an effort to get the NIH to disclose certain particulars of … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, deeply troubling, Public Citizen, sucks
Comments Off on “Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 2
Hormones and Patents
Graham Dutfield at the University of Leeds has published an article on the development of medical hormone products and patent law, “Patent on Steroids: What Hormones Tell Us about the Evolution of Patent Law.” The article doesn’t do as much … Continue reading
Posted in History, Innovation
Tagged hormones, invention, patents, pharmaceutical
Comments Off on Hormones and Patents
“Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 1
In 2002, a district court provided an implicit interpretation of a key word in the Bayh-Dole Act. No, not “of”–but rather “promote.” Let’s look at “promote” in Bayh-Dole, and then at the case. The first section of Bayh-Dole, 35 USC … Continue reading