GCVI Summit 2018
Skip Content

13 December 2011

Kauffman funds IP Advocate

The education campaign, Stanford v. Roche: University Ownership versus Stewardship, will examine the implications of the High Court's ruling handed down in June, which found that universities could not use the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act to claim ownership of inventions made with federal support when the ruling went in favour of Switzerland-based pharmaceutical group Roche rather than the US university.

Author: James Mawson

IP Advocate, a US-based non-profit organisation for university faculty researchers on patent rights and the process of commercialisation, has received a grant from entrepreneurs group Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation to create awareness of the US Supreme Court's Stanford v. Roche decision among university investigators and inventors.

The education campaign, Stanford v. Roche: University Ownership versus Stewardship, will examine the implications of the High Court's ruling handed down in June, which found that universities could not use the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act to claim ownership of inventions made with federal support when the ruling went in favour of Switzerland-based pharmaceutical group Roche rather than the US university.

The IP Advocate campaign will focus on the theme of "freedom to invent" that underlies research innovation and is advised by Gerald Barnett, a former senior technology transfer officer at the University of Washington and in the University of California system.

Rhaz Zeisler, executive director at IP Advocate, said: "The Supreme Court decision gives us a mandate to have a public discussion.

"We're delighted to have the support of the Kauffman Foundation in this important work. The opportunity to educate academic researchers on their rights and responsibilities is fundamental to our shared mission of fostering innovation and entrepreneurship.'"

The IP Advocate campaign will focus on the theme of freedom to invent that underlies research innovation and is advised by Gerald Barnett, a former senior technology transfer officer at the University of Washington and in the University of California system.

Barnett said: "Bayh-Dole is an important law governing federal agency interest in inventions made with their support.

"In recent years, however, it has been portrayed as stripping university inventors of their rights in favor of university bureaucrats. The Supreme Court flatly rejected this portrayal in Stanford v. Roche. University administrators have used their misinterpretation of Bayh-Dole to force assignment of inventions to their universities."

IP Advocate said since the ruling university administrators were trying to claim exclusive title to all inventions made by faculty and other university research personnel. Renee Kaswan, founder of IP Advocate, said: "We are now in a worse situation than before Bayh-Dole existed.

"Bayh-Dole freed university inventors from the compulsory ownership claims of federal agencies. Now, universities are making their own compulsory claims on all faculty and student inventions. Our campaign aims to restore in universities the freedom to invent, which is at the heart of Bayh-Dole and American university innovation."

Copyright Mawsonia Limited 2010. Please don´t cut articles from www.globaluniversityventuring.com or the PDF and redistribute by email or post to the web without written permission.

  • Linkedin
  • Mail
  • Rssfeed