Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Bayh-Dole
What Happens Here is Excluded Here
I was in Mexico recently as part of a 5 week training program for new technology transfer professionals. Our piece of the training was negotiation and licensing. The participants had brought with them real world examples from their own institutions–opportunities … Continue reading
Life Made Uneasy
If under Bayh-Dole a university defaults on electing to retain title, and the agency fails to act on title within sixty days of notice of this default, what then? Is there a second right of refusal that arises because the … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Comments Off on Life Made Uneasy
Love Me Two Times
Is there a “second right of refusal” in Bayh-Dole? That is, if the university waives its retaining title, and the agency declines to require conveyance of title, what then? Under Bayh-Dole, the interest passes to the inventors, who may request … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Comments Off on Love Me Two Times
Looking for Relief
The Stanford v. Roche case helps us understand a few things. First, that some leading lights in university technology transfer don’t have a grip on Bayh-Dole or public policy around innovation. There’s plenty to be debated, and we get it … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Comments Off on Looking for Relief
The Folks that Matter
Who matters in university invention management? I suggest these are: 1) the investigators–it is *their* research in university settings; 2) the inventors–they invent within the context of the investigators’ research–they should have standing within this context; 3) the community–these folk, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on The Folks that Matter
It’s not an invention until….
For an invention to be made, it has to be recognized as inventive by the inventor. See MPEP 2138. “There must be a contemporaneous recognition and appreciation of the invention for there to be conception.” For university investigators, this means … Continue reading
I read the brief today, oh boy
I worked through the MIT amicus brief in Stanford v. Roche. Better than AUTM and WARF. In brief, it wastes time on stuff that doesn’t relate, such as how important government research is to MIT. Instead it should focus on … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on I read the brief today, oh boy
Optimal Boeufmerde: AUTM’s model of tech transfer can’t get any better
The Kauffman Foundation (reminder: co-funds RTEI but has nothing to do with this blog or my opinions) suggested in a recent proposal that university licensing practice was “sub-optimal.” This has gotten the rile up in the lost territorial alley dog … Continue reading
Punishment: Write on the Board Many Times
Bayh-Dole is not automagical. Bayh-Dole does not strip university inventors of their patent rights. Bayh-Dole does not require or force or assume university ownership of patents. Bayh-Dole does not make it impossible for university bureaucrats to mess up. Bayh-Dole does … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Punishment: Write on the Board Many Times
Bad Advice for Bureaucrats
There is advice out and around that the lesson of Stanford v. Roche is to always use “hereby assigns” rather than “agrees to assign” in employment contracts dealing with patent rights. For universities, it’s not good advice. First, it misses … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, IP, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Bad Advice for Bureaucrats