Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Tag Archives: contractor
Bayh-Dole’s Ruby Slippers
This is a story about 35 USC 201(b), 35 USC 202(a), 37 CFR 401.9, and 37 CFR 401.14(f)(2) and (g)(1). These provisions of Bayh-Dole, implementing regulations, and standard patent rights clause, when read together, create ruby slippers. [I’ve revised the … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 35 USC 202(a), Bayh-Dole, contractor, ruby slippers, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Ruby Slippers
Only Bayh-Dole and University Research Enterprise, 4
Consider, then, this (f)(2) written agreement requirement that’s outside Bayh-Dole but made a condition of federal funding agreements anyway. The (f)(2) requirement is most certainly not a private patent agreement between a university as employer and its faculty inventors. It … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole applies only to subject inventions
Bayh-Dole has three parts–a contracting part, a federal licensing part, and a general part. The general part includes 35 USC 200 (statement of policy and objectives), 35 USC 210 (precedence and general requirements), and 35 USC 211 (antitrust). When people … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, contractor, standard patent rights clause, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole applies only to subject inventions
The devils in the details: Bayh-Dole supports academic freedom, 1
Bayh-Dole supports the academic freedom of faculty inventors. University administrators refuse to comply. Here, we walk through the law, the implementing regulations, the various patent rights clauses to show the result. Fair warning to university administrators reading this piece. I … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Freedom, Sponsored Research, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.14, 37 CFR 401.9, academic freedom, Bayh-Dole, contractor, funding agreement, patent, subject invention, turdly
Comments Off on The devils in the details: Bayh-Dole supports academic freedom, 1
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, 4: contractor
A primary focus of Bayh-Dole is the disposition of invention rights in funding agreements between federal agencies and nonprofit organizations and small businesses. Funding agreements can take the form of contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements, and these agreements are extended … Continue reading
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 Key Provisions of Bayh-Dole
Now, with all that fusstation from the University of Pittsburgh out of the way, we might ask then what are the “key provisions” of Bayh-Dole that a university should make faculty and the public aware of. Only One Key Provision … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer
Tagged Bayh-Dole, compliance, contractor, invention, inventor, patent, patent rights clause
Comments Off on The Key Provisions of Bayh-Dole