Category Archives: Policy

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 5

Let’s say that companies have diverse views about patenting, as the Harbridge House report documented, and some companies might decline to participate in federal research because they can’t get title to inventions and won’t settle for a mere license. We … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 5

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 4

The origins of the argument for “mixing” government and private research funds can be found in the 1968 Harbridge House report. The report identifies six industry attitudes toward patenting, ranging from indifference to defensive positions to critical to business. The special … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Sponsored Research | 1 Comment

That special special case 6: Bayh-Dole the enabler

The Benefits of the Special Special Case There’s a good argument that the special special case has put more money into the pharmaceutical industry than would otherwise be there. The chase for such lucrative profits has in turn attracted speculators … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Comments Off on That special special case 6: Bayh-Dole the enabler

That special special case 5: From invention to patent to flip

Patent System and Public Covenants If the patent system is good as it is, and does not require a public covenant to run with inventions made in federally supported research, then why should federal policy endorse the two circumventions of … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on That special special case 5: From invention to patent to flip

That special special case 4: Making it general

The special special case was turned into a general case, the only case, the best practice case. According to this new general case, inventions generally require private risk capital to become useful. Institutions must take on the responsibility to find … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , | Comments Off on That special special case 4: Making it general

That special special case 3: The Kennedy patent policy

The special special case arose in the Kennedy patent policy in 1963. Look at the parameters. Here is the premise: A. The government expends large sums for the conduct of research and development which results in a considerable number of … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy | Comments Off on That special special case 3: The Kennedy patent policy

That special special case 2: Circumventing the patent system

Here is the public policy agenda of Bayh-Dole. If one cuts through the apparatus and the happy-talk, Bayh-Dole stipulates that the patent system is to be used to create company monopolies on inventions made with private support, using private patent … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Policy | Comments Off on That special special case 2: Circumventing the patent system

The banal myth of the necessary institutional monopoly

Louis Rosenfeld wrote an insightful article in Clinical Chemistry on the discovery of insulin “Insulin: Discovery and Controversy.” Three collaborators in the research had a disagreement over inventive contributions to various portions of the work and to settle their disputes gave … Continue reading

Posted in Innovation, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on The banal myth of the necessary institutional monopoly

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 3

This third form of mixing–intentional–created the problem for the PHS and universities in the area of medicinal chemistry. It was not mixing in the abstract; not mixing in an open university environment, but rather intentional mixing. The drug industry had … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 3

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 2

We can distinguish three forms of “mixing” of funding. (1) Two or more projects, each funded on different terms, in which their participants, having the freedom of the university, talk with one another, learn things, and apply what they learn … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 2