Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Author Archives: Gerald Barnett
Bayh-Dole Basics, 4: contractor comments
Bayh-Dole defines anyone on the other side of a funding agreement from a federal agency as a contractor. The term is arbitrary and misleading. Let’s look at both aspects. The standard patent rights clause requires the contractors that host federally … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.14(a), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, contractor, faux, predatory, small business, Stanford v Roche, subcontract
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 4: contractor comments
Bayh-Dole Basics, 4: contractor
A primary focus of Bayh-Dole is the disposition of invention rights in funding agreements between federal agencies and nonprofit organizations and small businesses. Funding agreements can take the form of contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements, and these agreements are extended … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole basics, 3: funding agreement comments
Bayh-Dole uses the definition of “funding agreement” for much heavy lifting. The definition does much more than merely restrict Bayh-Dole’s interest to grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. The definition establishes the scope of the law to include experimental work, developmental … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 37 CFR 401.14, 37 CFR 401.9, aztec, Bayh-Dole, boogers, contractor, development, funding agreement
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 3: funding agreement comments
Bayh-Dole Basics, 3: funding agreement
Bayh-Dole requires federal agencies to use a standard patent rights clause in every funding agreement for experimental work, development, or research, unless they can justify something different. A “funding agreement” is defined (35 USC 201(b)) as any contract, grant, or … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, funding agreement
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 3: funding agreement
Bayh-Dole basics, 2: subject invention comments
There are three categories of invention in Bayh-Dole–inventions arising in federally supported research or development, subject inventions, and inventions owned by the federal government. The general scope of Bayh-Dole given in 35 USC 200 is that of “inventions arising in … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged assignment, Bayh-Dole, invention, patent, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 2: subject invention comments
Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention
For federal research and development contracts, Bayh-Dole defines a new category of invention in federal patent law, the “subject invention.” A subject invention is an invention that is or may be patentable is owned by a party to a funding … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention
Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2
Mississippi State provides us with this diagram of the “commercialization” process that ends up with a singular “license.” What goofiness–an assertion of order in an activity that is almost always disorderly. According to the diagram, “ideas” get “protected” and then “marketed” … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, commercialization, Mississippi State University, patent
Comments Off on Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2
“Only assholes get patents…”
Slashdot points to a recent blog post by Marco Arment on dealing with feature copying and imitation in software apps. Arment summaries copyright and trademark angles, noting that neither provides much defense. He then moves on to patents: Only assholes … Continue reading
The booger way of innovation
Consider these two pathways by which universities might acquire inventions under Bayh-Dole’s patent rights clause. 1. Non-compliant. University by policy asserts ownership of all inventions made by faculty. University refuses to comply with the (f)(2) written agreement requirement in Bayh-Dole’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged 37 CFR 401.14(a), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, boogers
Comments Off on The booger way of innovation
Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments
University patent administrators ignore Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200. At best, they treat it as a statement of objectives, not policy, and that these objectives are a problem for Congress if no one bothers to accomplish them. … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 35 USC 200, Bayh-Dole, invention, public covenant
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments