Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Bayh-Dole
15 USC 2218(d)
[updated to make clear 15 USC 2218(d) is specific to fire prevention and control legislation] A federal statute passed in 1974 establishes a federal policy with regard to inventions made with federal support–15 USC 2218(d), part of a fire safety … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy
Tagged 15 USC 2218, Bayh-Dole, FARs, Federal Procurement Regulations, preemption
Comments Off on 15 USC 2218(d)
“Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 2
We might ask, then, what happens if a contractor does not acquire ownership of an invention made in the performance of work under a federal funding agreement. The answer is that the Nixon patent policy as revised remains in effect, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, contractor, slop, subject invention
Comments Off on “Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 2
“Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 1
Bayh-Dole requires federal agencies to use a patent rights clause that includes a provision under which contractors who obtain ownership of a patentable invention made in the performance of work under a federal funding agreement and elect to retain that … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Stanford v Roche
Tagged Bayh-Dole, government license, inherent government function, patent rights clause, slop
Comments Off on “Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 1
Does Bayh-Dole Require a Written Assignment?
Does Bayh-Dole require a written assignment? No. But Bayh-Dole is screwy. I’ll elaborate. Look all you want, there’s no assignment requirement in Bayh-Dole. Heck, the Supreme Court looked for an assignment requirement and couldn’t find it. Here’s how the majority … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 35 USC 202(a), 37 CFR 401.9, assignment, Bayh-Dole
Comments Off on Does Bayh-Dole Require a Written Assignment?
Why do we have Norman Latker’s fantasy rather than Vannevar Bush’s fantasy?
There’s a number of people out blaming Bayh-Dole for high drug prices. There’s plenty to blame Bayh-Dole for–it’s an ugly law with a dismal track record. And there are ways that Bayh-Dole can be implicated in high drug prices, but … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, bureaucratic brain, loony, sucks, Vannevar Bush
Comments Off on Why do we have Norman Latker’s fantasy rather than Vannevar Bush’s fantasy?
28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 4
In 1980, in introducing S. 414, Senator Dole repeats the 28,000 patents meme: Now, however, it’s 5 percent, not 4 percent, and it’s not inventions licensed but rather inventions used. It’s a wonderful bit of bluffery. There’s nothing in Forman’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged basic science, Bayh-Dole, bluff, Dole, investment, Vannever Bush
Comments Off on 28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 4
Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 3
A careful read of Bayh-Dole and its omission of the patent agreement requirement argues not only did Bayh-Dole reverse the “presumption” of federal ownership of inventions made under contract but also repudiated the federal requirement that contractors own inventions so … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, FPR, SPRC, work of clowns
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 3
Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 2
We are looking at how Bayh-Dole botches invention ownership. Where the Federal Procurement Regulations implemented in 1975 were clear, Bayh-Dole in 1980 is muddy. The FPR approach is simple: contractors must have patent agreements that ensure that contractors will be … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 1
Bayh-Dole botches its management of invention ownership. To see how, we need to look at how Bayh-Dole in 1980 changed the Federal Procurement Regulation put in place in 1975. In particular, let’s look at how the definition of subject invention … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged 41 CFR 9-1, assignment, Bayh-Dole, botch, equitable title, Federal Procurement Regulations, of the contractor, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 1
A clever misrepresentation at the origin of Bayh-Dole
Let’s see if we can isolate the origin of the Bayh-Dole Act. In about four minutes, you will read the following again: The roots, then, of Bayh-Dole are to be found in a mischaracterization of the Harbridge House report of … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History
Tagged 41 CFR 9-1, Bayh-Dole, General Services Administration, monopoly meme
Comments Off on A clever misrepresentation at the origin of Bayh-Dole