Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

A look at recent startups at Duke

A recent tweet called out the Duke University technology transfer program for starting 12 companies so far in 2022. That’s a good number of startups for a university. We should applaud. But the tweet went on to attribute the startups … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Startups | Tagged , , | Comments Off on A look at recent startups at Duke

Mixing Two Governments’ Funding

Here’s an interesting statement of government rights in a University of Arizona patent, 9239453 B2. (I’d link to the USPTO patent server, but since the change in search software, it’s not obviously possible.): GOVERNMENT RIGHTS (1) This invention was made … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Patents | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Mixing Two Governments’ Funding

The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 4

Finally, we reach Xtandi. The authors provide the pricing of $156,000 per year, but don’t point out that generic manufacturers have offered to produce Xtandi for $3 per pill–or about $4,300 per year. There’s a claim that Astellas has spent $1.4 … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 4

The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 3

We are working through a new article on Bayh-Dole march-in, written by two PhD patent attorneys. In its way, the article is more puff piece than law review, drawing its frame from the sources chosen, not much looking at the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , | Comments Off on The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 3

The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 2

We are working through an article about the possibility that the federal government might use march-in to address unreasonable pricing for Xtandi. The case for march-in is as strong as any could be. But to get at this issue, our … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 2

The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 1

Dr. Rebecca McFadyen and Dr. Tara Nealey–both working for an IP law firm–have published an article “Will old Bayh-Dole be taught new tricks?” Me, Dr. Barnett–not working for an IP law firm–thinks they have got it wrong. Consider: Before 1980 … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The failed Bayh-Dole bargain, 1

WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act”?–2

We have worked over the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s account of the statute. Sure, Bayh-Dole is a complicated mess, but that’s no excuse for getting the law so wrong, with such a lack of consistency and careful distinction. But there it is. … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act”?–2

WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act”?–3

[This article published before I finished it! — so there will be updates as I add citations and discussion.] We have been through the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s nonsense about Bayh-Dole. I’ve provided some brief comments. Now let’s work through some of … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act”?–3

WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act?”–1

Here is the “Bayh-Dole Coalition” on “What is the Bayh-Dole Act?” I will quote, mark up, and then comment briefly. There is more to write, but here’s enough to show that the Coalition has no grasp of the law, or … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , | Comments Off on WTF is the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s “What is the Bayh-Dole Act?”–1

A very short primer on reasonable price

Joe Allen writes this: “Price was not something march-in rights were ever meant to control, and wielding them this way would be a misuse of the law and it would kill Bayh-Dole.” This is nonsense. Allen provides no evidence for … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on A very short primer on reasonable price