Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole
Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention
For federal research and development contracts, Bayh-Dole defines a new category of invention in federal patent law, the “subject invention.” A subject invention is an invention that is or may be patentable is owned by a party to a funding … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention
Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2
Mississippi State provides us with this diagram of the “commercialization” process that ends up with a singular “license.” What goofiness–an assertion of order in an activity that is almost always disorderly. According to the diagram, “ideas” get “protected” and then “marketed” … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, commercialization, Mississippi State University, patent
Comments Off on Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2
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
Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments
University patent administrators ignore Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200. At best, they treat it as a statement of objectives, not policy, and that these objectives are a problem for Congress if no one bothers to accomplish them. … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged 35 USC 200, Bayh-Dole, invention, public covenant
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments
Bayh-Dole Basics, 1: public covenant
The Bayh-Dole Act is part of federal patent law. Bayh-Dole establishes a policy (35 USC 200) regarding the use of the patent system for inventions arising in federally supported research or development. This policy establishes the property rights in patents … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, policy, public covenant
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 1: public covenant
Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole
Here’s Mississippi State University’s Office Technology Management answering the question “Why does the University patent technology?” It is required under federal grants – The University is required to patent and commercialize the technology under terms of the Bayh-Dole Act. If the … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, inventions, Kawasaki, Lie #7, Mississippi State University, patents
Comments Off on Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole
You should want to see Bayh-Dole operate as written. Here’s why.
Let’s start with some Bayh-Dole basics. Bayh-Dole preempts all other statutes but Stevenson-Wydler on matters of federal policy on inventions made in research contracts (35 USC 210). Bayh-Dole is the only authority on the matter. Bayh-Dole requires federal agencies to … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), assignment, Bayh-Dole, KEI, Stanford v Roche, subject invention, substantial rights
Comments Off on You should want to see Bayh-Dole operate as written. Here’s why.
How Bayh-Dole complicates the definitions in Stevenson-Wydler
The only law that Bayh-Dole does not expressly supersede is the Stevenson-Wydler Act. It’s worth comparing language in the two laws, as Bayh-Dole draws from Stevenson-Wydler, but then works its own magic. Consider the definition cascade on inventions. Here’s Stevenson-Wydler: … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, invention, Stevenson-Wydler, subject invention
Comments Off on How Bayh-Dole complicates the definitions in Stevenson-Wydler
Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 3
Having established the contracting problem for government-sponsored “basic research,” let’s get into how the patent administration folks got into changing things around from government ownership (with its open access, often without conditions or formalities) to institutional ownership (or, more accurately, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer
Tagged Bayh-Dole, inventions, IPA, patents
Comments Off on Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 3
Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 2
The “Whistling” article struggles with the problem of the standard patent rights clause language about “electing to retain title.” I’ve wondered over this wording for years. It appears to be at the heart of the “cleverly crafted scheme” to intercept … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Stanford v Roche
Tagged Bayh-Dole, institutional patent agreement, invention, IPA, research sponsor, scope of rights, sponsored research
Comments Off on Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 2