Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Tag Archives: 37 CFR 401.9
Bayh-Dole Basics, 4: contractor comments
Bayh-Dole defines anyone on the other side of a funding agreement from a federal agency as a contractor. The term is arbitrary and misleading. Let’s look at both aspects. The standard patent rights clause requires the contractors that host federally … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.14(a), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, contractor, faux, predatory, small business, Stanford v Roche, subcontract
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 4: contractor comments
Bayh-Dole basics, 3: funding agreement comments
Bayh-Dole uses the definition of “funding agreement” for much heavy lifting. The definition does much more than merely restrict Bayh-Dole’s interest to grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements. The definition establishes the scope of the law to include experimental work, developmental … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 37 CFR 401.14, 37 CFR 401.9, aztec, Bayh-Dole, boogers, contractor, development, funding agreement
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 3: funding agreement comments
The booger way of innovation
Consider these two pathways by which universities might acquire inventions under Bayh-Dole’s patent rights clause. 1. Non-compliant. University by policy asserts ownership of all inventions made by faculty. University refuses to comply with the (f)(2) written agreement requirement in Bayh-Dole’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged 37 CFR 401.14(a), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, boogers
Comments Off on The booger way of innovation
Going to Eleven on NIST and (f)(2)
NIST is drafting new rules for the standard patent rights clause authorized by Bayh-Dole. Included in the proposed new provisions is a requirement that contractors require the assignment of inventions to the contractor. This is a bad idea. Besides, it’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Sponsored Research, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, NIST, Stanford v Roche, vesting statute
Comments Off on Going to Eleven on NIST and (f)(2)
Some Questions from a Future FAQ on Bayh-Dole
Q. Can a university violate the Bayh-Dole Act? A. No. Bayh-Dole applies to federal agencies. The law requires federal agencies to adopt uniform practices regarding patent rights to inventions in funding agreements. Bayh-Dole (now) authorizes the Department of Commerce to … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.14, 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, patent rights clause
Comments Off on Some Questions from a Future FAQ on Bayh-Dole
How Bayh-Dole failed to protect faculty inventors (from university administrators)
[Now with some revisions in the second paragraph that on reflection were worth making.] There are a number of things wrong with the Bayh-Dole Act, such as the lack of accountability for the disposition of privately held patents on inventions … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, faculty inventor, person
Comments Off on How Bayh-Dole failed to protect faculty inventors (from university administrators)
More problems with the wild success of Bayh-Dole
There are plenty of jewels in Gene Quinn’s recent opinion piece. Perhaps the readers at IP Watchdog are all true believers in Bayh-Dole, so Mr. Quinn does not feel much need to work hard at what he writes. Here at Research … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, IP Watchdog
Comments Off on More problems with the wild success of Bayh-Dole
37 CFR 401.9
There’s something interesting about 37 CFR 401.9. Okay, so you don’t have Bayh-Dole memorized. 37 CFR 401.9 is the provision that implements, among other things, 35 USC 202 (d), which is the part of the Act that allows inventors to … Continue reading