Category Archives: Bayh-Dole

The Faster Cures FAQ on Bayh-Dole, 2

Posted on April 10, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

We are working through the Faster Cures FAQ on Bayh-Dole. 2. What does Bayh-Dole say about the ownership of inventions and technologies? Pursuant to Bayh-Dole, universities and other nonprofit organizations that receive federal funding, may “elect to retain title to … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Faster Cures FAQ on Bayh-Dole, 2

The Faster Cures FAQ on Bayh-Dole, 1

Posted on April 9, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Faster Cures has at its web site a FAQ on Bayh-Dole. Let’s work through their account of Bayh-Dole and help them where they appear challenged. 1. What is the Bayh-Dole Act? Co-sponsored by Senators Birch Bayh of Indiana and Robert … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Faster Cures FAQ on Bayh-Dole, 1

Political bluffing as Bayh-Dole policy advice, 2

Posted on April 6, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

This, then, is the “policy” of Bayh-Dole that Allen champions–that nonprofits can and should deal in patent monopolies. Some historical bluffing from Allen’s policy advice (his emphasis): At that time the federal government funded about half of the R&D in … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, History | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Political bluffing as Bayh-Dole policy advice, 2

Political bluffing as Bayh-Dole policy advice, 1

Posted on April 5, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

In a once-notorious essay (“Is Business Bluffing Ethical“) Albert Carr, a former presidential advisor, argues that business “bluffing” is ethical because business is based on games, and in games bluffing is perfectly acceptable. Same for politics. If everyone expects everyone … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, History | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Political bluffing as Bayh-Dole policy advice, 1

The Basic Policy Question Behind Bayh-Dole

Posted on April 4, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

There’s one simple issue: Should the federal government subsidize with public funding for nonprofit research the creation of patent monopolies? There it is. The answer that has dominated for thirty-five years is “Yes.” How comfortable are you with that? Gut-level? … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Basic Policy Question Behind Bayh-Dole

We are not talking about the rainbows

Posted on April 2, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

A while ago, Research Enterprise argued that the “manufactured substantially” requirement in Bayh-Dole, for all its gesture toward American manufacturing, is a nearly empty requirement. Absurdly narrow, easy to circumvent, waivable by federal agencies (“we tried and failed” or “we … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on We are not talking about the rainbows

University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 4

Posted on March 29, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

So now back to UConn’s patent policy claim. Look at it again: Under Connecticut state law, the University owns all inventions created by employees in the performance of employment with the University or created with University resources or funds administered … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , | Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 4

University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 3

Posted on March 28, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Here’s UConn’s policy on invention ownership: Under Connecticut state law, the University owns all inventions created by employees in the performance of employment with the University or created with University resources or funds administered by the University (“University Inventions”). No … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 3

University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 2

Posted on March 27, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

The definition of subject invention in federal funding agreements is not a matter of university administrator preference. Either an invention meets the definition of subject invention or it doesn’t. The administrator’s job is to gather the documentation that provides the … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 2

University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 1

Posted on March 26, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Let’s work through the University of Connecticut’s intellectual property practice on disclosure and ownership of inventions. We will start in the middle, with a disclosure form–much like a university inventor might do. UConn has an “Innovation Alert” web “portal” that … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 1