Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Bayh-Dole
Learning from Latker’s 1984 “Federal Initiatives for Innovation” Talk, 3
Norman Latker, formerly patent counsel at the NIH and chief architect of Bayh-Dole and its extension by Presidential memorandum to all federal contracting, argues that if federal inventions are not privately owned and exploited for their exclusionary and financial value, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, exclusive license, Latker, risk capital
Comments Off on Learning from Latker’s 1984 “Federal Initiatives for Innovation” Talk, 3
Learning from Latker’s 1984 “Federal Initiatives for Innovation” Talk, 2
Let’s return to Norman Latker’s talk from 1984, “Federal Initiatives for Innovation.” Keep in mind, Latker drafted the IPA master agreement, the Bayh-Dole Act, Reagan’s 1983 memorandum that displaced the Kennedy and Nixon patent policies, the 1984 amendments to Bayh-Dole … Continue reading
Senator Nelson on the problem of “public interest” in federal patent policy, 2
The federal public policy for inventions made in federally funded work then becomes “whatever the contractor that hosts the work chooses to do, so long as the contractor files a patent application.” In Bayh-Dole, there’s no federal review of a … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, Latker, Public Citizen, public interest
Comments Off on Senator Nelson on the problem of “public interest” in federal patent policy, 2
Senator Nelson on the problem of “public interest” in federal patent policy, 1
The “public interest” plays an important role in federal invention policy. In 1963, President Kennedy announced a policy that permitted nonprofit organizations to request to retain title to inventions made in federally funded work, providing that Where the commercial interests … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Vannever Bush
Tagged Bayh-Dole, IPA, Nelson, patent policy, public interest
Comments Off on Senator Nelson on the problem of “public interest” in federal patent policy, 1
Learning from Latker’s 1984 “Federal Initiatives for Innovation” Talk
In 1984 Norman Latker, who as NIH patent counsel drafted the Bayh-Dole Act on the sly, gave a talk (“Federal Initiatives For Innovation“) to the American Intellectual Property Association. At the time, Latker worked for the Department of Commerce, and … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Technology Transfer, Vannever Bush
Tagged Bayh-Dole, Latker
Comments Off on Learning from Latker’s 1984 “Federal Initiatives for Innovation” Talk
Congressional Intent and Bayh-Dole reasonable terms
We have looked at the idea of Congressional intent in the Bayh-Dole Act and contrasted this intent with the claims of enemies of Bayh-Dole who argue that they have secret inside knowledge of the true intent that should govern the … Continue reading
Congressional Intent and Bayh-Dole’s government license
Some folks who claim to advocate “for” Bayh-Dole, but actually are the law’s worst enemies, argue using the line “Bayh-Dole was never intended . . . .” They leave out the part about who they mean has been doing the … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, government license, intention
Comments Off on Congressional Intent and Bayh-Dole’s government license
Another Question on RE: Does a subject invention have to be enabling?
A new question showed up in the RE search queue: “does a subject invention have to be enabling?” How to unwind this one? We can try. Another way to put it might be, “when does something new–an idea, an insight, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 35 USC 201(e), 35 USC 202(c)(1), 37 CFR 401.14(c)(1), disclosure, enablement, subject invention
Comments Off on Another Question on RE: Does a subject invention have to be enabling?
Making Bayh-Dole March-in and Government License Work
There’s a lot of stirrings about using Bayh-Dole’s march-in procedure to address the high price of drugs in the United States. Under march-in, a federal agency has the right to require a federal contractor (or anyone who is an assignee … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, march-in, practice and have practiced
Comments Off on Making Bayh-Dole March-in and Government License Work
Another question on RE: are exclusive license and assignment the same thing?
Here’s another question on RE: “is an exclusive license of technology and an assignment the same thing?” Answer: yes and no. Let’s talk exclusive license and assignment of inventions rather than technology. An assignment expressly conveys title to an invention. … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 35 USC 202(c)(7)(A), assignment, exclusive license
Comments Off on Another question on RE: are exclusive license and assignment the same thing?