Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Category Archives: Stanford v Roche
“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
Patent agreements in Federal Procurement Regulations and Bayh-Dole, 2
If we return for a moment to O’Connor’s article–it is a great read for what it aims to do, but for O’Connor’s theme of abstract mistaken assumptions rather than providing a specific account of Latker’s lack of drafting ability–there is … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Sponsored Research, Stanford v Roche
Tagged assignment, Bayh-Dole, Federal Procurement Regulations, Latker, O'Connor, patent agreement, sly, written agreement
Comments Off on Patent agreements in Federal Procurement Regulations and Bayh-Dole, 2
Invention, subject invention, and the clever scheme of Bayh-Dole
Here is the definition of invention in the Kennedy executive branch patent policy, 1963 (Section 4(b)): Invention or Invention or discovery–includes any art, machine, manufacture, design, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, or any variety … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Sponsored Research, Stanford v Roche
Tagged bamboozled, Bayh-Dole, Federal Procurement Regulations, invention, subject invention
Comments Off on Invention, subject invention, and the clever scheme of Bayh-Dole
More Impractical Advice About NIST’s Changes to Bayh-Dole’s Regulations
NIST–can’t live with them, but law firms sure can. Here’s another law firm popping off about NIST’s recent revisions to Bayh-Dole’s implementing regulations and standard patent rights clause. Keep in mind that NIST’s chief counsel is already on record not … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, clueless, garble, impractical advice, NIST, present assignment, ridiculous
Comments Off on More Impractical Advice About NIST’s Changes to Bayh-Dole’s Regulations
Best practices in university invention management, 1
Things get complicated that don’t have to be complicated when it comes to university ownership of inventions. Administrators make things complicated, then argue for lots of money to pay for the talent to navigate those complications, and then more money … Continue reading
Posted in Agreements, Bozonet, Freedom, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer
Tagged invention, ipHandbook, ownership, policy
Comments Off on Best practices in university invention management, 1
Has NIST finally created a foobar standard patent rights clause?
Words in laws ought to mean something. According to Bayh-Dole’s standard patent rights clause, the initial contractor must require its employees to make a written agreement to establish the government’s rights in subject inventions. But, but, but . . . … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Stanford v Roche
Tagged assignment, Bayh-Dole, new rule, NIST
Comments Off on Has NIST finally created a foobar standard patent rights clause?
NIST smokes Stanford v Roche, 2
Let’s get simple about the NIST rule change on assignment of subject inventions. This requires logic. I’m sorry about that. I know it’s not the Bayh-Dole way. Supreme Court: Bayh-Dole applies only to subject inventions. A subject invention is an … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Stanford v Roche
Tagged equitable title, NIST, prissy, Stanford v Roche, vesting, written agreement
Comments Off on NIST smokes Stanford v Roche, 2
NIST smokes Stanford v Roche
I don’t know what NIST folks were thinking (fortunately). But here’s what may have happened. They may have in fact read Stanford v Roche, but that clearly has not helped them. They are still clueless. Supreme Court: Bayh-Dole applies only … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Stanford v Roche
Tagged Bayh-Dole, NIST, Stanford v Roche, stupid
Comments Off on NIST smokes Stanford v Roche
University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 4
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 IP policy, Stanford v Roche, University of Connecticut
Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 4
University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 1
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 Bayh-Dole, Connecticut, invention disclosure, Moloch beer, present assignment, Stanford v Roche
Comments Off on University of Connecticut patent practice hash, 1