Tag Archives: exclusivity

Necessary Federal Exclusive Licensing

The Harbridge House report in 1968 mused that based on survey responses from nonprofit patent administrators, . . . the inventions must frequently arise from basic research and require substantial private development before reaching the stage where they are commercially … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Necessary Federal Exclusive Licensing

University Patent Policy for Effective Technology Transfer, 10: Exclusivity compared

Now let’s look at a university that defaults to seeking an exclusive patent licensee instead. That comparison is even worse for leading with a patent license vs research review. There are way fewer folks out there in the technical world … Continue reading

Posted in Policy, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on University Patent Policy for Effective Technology Transfer, 10: Exclusivity compared

Harbridge House on university exclusive licensing, 1

The Harbridge House report on government patent policy in 1968 laid the foundation for Bayh-Dole. Or, rather, federal officials selectively used portions of the report to change federal policy to conform to the wishes of patent development firms affiliated with … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Harbridge House on university exclusive licensing, 1

Why dealing in patent monopolies is bad for university research

[updated to add some comments among the elements of the list] Bayh-Dole expands the opportunity for universities to deal in patent monopolies on inventions made in federally supported work. Bayh-Dole does not require such behavior, does not give any special … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Freedom, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Why dealing in patent monopolies is bad for university research