Author Archives: Gerald Barnett

Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 5: Commercial Potential

We have looked at legacy Penn State IP policy–from 1940 and from 1991. And we have worked through an especially bad piece of drafting in the Penn State IP Agreement, which ignores IP policy, conflates patents and copyrights, garbles Bayh-Dole … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Comments Off on Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 5: Commercial Potential

Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 4: The 1992 IP Agreement, con’t

Now we can look at Part B of Penn State’s 1992 IP Agreement. Part B concerns extramural contracts and starts with another general statement: I also understand that, whenever I am associated with activities which are financially supported by contracts … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Policy | Comments Off on Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 4: The 1992 IP Agreement, con’t

Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 3: The 1992 IP Agreement, con’t

We are looking at the Penn State IP Agreement in its 1992 form. Part (A) of the agreement sets out what appears on the surface to be a broad scope for inventions (and other stuff) to be assigned to the … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Policy | Comments Off on Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 3: The 1992 IP Agreement, con’t

Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 2: The 1992 IP Agreement, Part A

Penn State manages its IP by means of an IP policy statement and an IP Agreement form. The policy statement made effective in 1991 requires various university personnel (including in the category “academic”–whatever that means) to “complete” an IP Agreement … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Policy | Comments Off on Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 2: The 1992 IP Agreement, Part A

Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 1: Working Through the 1991 IP Policy

Hey, let’s compare Penn State’s “Intellectual Property Agreement” from 1992 with the present version. I know, just what you were hoping to do today–identify  policy changes to see how Penn State created its IP protection racket. To get there, we’ll … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Penn State’s IP Protection Racket, 1: Working Through the 1991 IP Policy

Penn State’s 1940 Patent Policy

Penn State University created one of the earliest university patent policies. That policy was revised in 1940. Let’s have a look, and then consider more recent policy statements at Penn State. Like many early university patent policies, Penn State’s policy … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Comments Off on Penn State’s 1940 Patent Policy

Bayh-Dole Bombast in Penn State’s 2001 Report on Technology Transfer

In 2001, Eva Pell, Penn State’s Vice President for Research prepared a report for the Trustees on “technology transfer.” In the discussion about why universities should be involved in technology transfer, Pell includes the following account of Bayh-Dole: Until 1980, … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Bombast in Penn State’s 2001 Report on Technology Transfer

Posting Update

It’s been a busy couple of weeks here. I’m in Santa Cruz for a few days helping with painting the house with my daughter and her husband. I’ve got a new set of articles almost ready to go, but they … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Posting Update

Patent Exploitation Alternatives

A patent allows a patent owner to exclude others from practicing the invention claimed by the patent–including any of its variants. A patent owner thus has a limited monopoly on the practice of the invention–making the invention, using the invention, … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP | Comments Off on Patent Exploitation Alternatives

Key Concept 5: Public Covenant (Addendum)

The Need for a Public Covenant A public covenant attached to a patent property right reflects a determination that the federal patent system, on its own, is not adequate to a given governmental or private purpose. We might say, a … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Freedom | Comments Off on Key Concept 5: Public Covenant (Addendum)