Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Policy
Make-Use Commons in TBED, 2
In the previous post, I discussed the problem of accumulating a patent portfolio as a way to generate licensing income. A portfolio approach can be financially successful, but in a patent world, it needs only one or two hits a … Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Make-Use Commons in TBED, 2
Make-Use Commons in TBED, 1
At the Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference in Portland a couple of weeks ago, I introduced the idea of a Make-Use Commons as a means of tying together research patent management and regional economic development. Let’s work through this idea. … Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Make-Use Commons in TBED, 1
Go West for Innovation!
Here is the biggest outcome of Stanford v Roche: Bayh-Dole does not require universities to take ownership of inventions made with federal funds, does not mandate that universities do so, does not restrain the rights of inventors so they can … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Go West for Innovation!
Bozocratic Dumbthink Alert
DLA Piper sent me an “alert” email with the heading “A Victory for Roche in a Case over Inventors’ Rights.” It includes this advice: The decision re-emphasizes the importance of university employers to require all employees and consultants to execute … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer
1 Comment
A Koan
The innovateur was compelled to visit first the City of Clowns. The clowns took the innovation from the innovateur. The clowns were not funny, and they were not helpful, and they were not innovative. The innovateur watched smoke rise from … Continue reading
Posted in Bozonet, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on A Koan
The Dark Lesson
There is a dark lesson in the Stanford v. Roche situation. For two years, university patent administrators have led an all-out attack on research inventors, have distorted Bayh-Dole, and demonstrated they form a monoculture of inventor-loathing, bureaucracy-creating political operators. It’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on The Dark Lesson
100% Bayh-Dole
There’s talk that the Stanford v. Roche decision somehow forces a change in university practice from using promises to assign in patent agreements to present assignments of future inventions. This is nonsense. The same loons who could not read Bayh-Dole … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on 100% Bayh-Dole
Seven Claims about Bayh-Dole
Let’s look at some of the claims made about Bayh-Dole. 1. Bayh-Dole is about commercialization. Only a little tiny bit. Get over it. No, really. Look at the objectives of the Act, at 35 USC 200. The primary emphasis is … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Seven Claims about Bayh-Dole
Harmonizing with the Wrong Thing
Which is more important, to harmonize US patent law with that of other countries, or to keep it consistent with the insights expressed in the US Constitution, which supports progress through the personal rights of inventors? The Constitution allows the … Continue reading
University "Commercialization" and "Commercialization Programs"
I argue that while new products on the market is a primary measure of commercialization, the critical metric for a university commercialization program is the number of unlicensed inventions that the university has claimed. Every unlicensed invention acts to suppress … Continue reading
Posted in Metrics, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on University "Commercialization" and "Commercialization Programs"