Category Archives: IP

When universities come trolling

Here is a question.  Is it a violation of Bayh-Dole for a university to sue a company for infringement of a subject invention for a monetary settlement? Bayh-Dole sets out its objectives in 35 USC 200.  We are not talking … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP | Comments Off on When universities come trolling

Does Bayh-Dole require a patent policy?

Here is a bit (see paragraph 9) from a major US university policy on treatment of inventions under Bayh-Dole: Incumbent upon members of the University community who apply for and receive federal funding to support research or who use federal … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Does Bayh-Dole require a patent policy?

The Moment In-Between

Here’s a neat essay by Chris Newfield that looks at the elements of innovation that underlie the development of Google from a snatch in a dream to becoming a global information and advertising silverback. One of the things that has … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Social Science, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Moment In-Between

Compulsory Monopolicy

I was having some fun with that last post.   Part of the purpose is to tweak the noses of some folks who I hear had a good time trashing this blog at their recent organizational meet-up.   Well, now.  Good fun … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Social Science, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Compulsory Monopolicy

Why university research IP policies should be different

I have written multiple times I don’t much care who wins Stanford v. Roche. I like universities and I like companies and I can see problems and advantages in both. I know some of the people at Stanford and don’t … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Why university research IP policies should be different

Live new or die

There are ways of thinking about ownership that make it sound perfectly normal for universities to own inventions made in research programs and to assign administrators the task of managing these, and any patents that issue on them. The further … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Social Science, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Live new or die

Back on the A-110

I would like to expand on what used to be OMB Circular A-110.  Section .36 deals with intangible property.  Bayh-Dole via 37 CFR 401 is incorporated by reference at .36(b). At (d), there is this text: Title to intangible property … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Back on the A-110

For every scenario, other scenarios

AUTM imagines faculty researchers messing around with patent obligations and creating a situation where no one has undivided ownership of a research invention.  To AUTM, this is horrifying.  How can one make money  exclusively licensing to monopolists to make a … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, IP, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on For every scenario, other scenarios

IP in 3DP

There are a couple of articles out now looking at IP in 3d printing.  For the UK, see this article by Simon Bradshaw, Adrian Bowyer, and Patrick Haufe, and for the US, this white paper by Michael Weinberg.   These articles … Continue reading

Posted in 3D Printing, IP | Comments Off on IP in 3DP

A Patent License in the DFARS

With all the talk about template patent licenses these days, I thought it might be worth pointing out that in the DFARS there is a template patent license that the Government expects when obtaining patent rights.  You can find it … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on A Patent License in the DFARS