I recently came across a headline that caught my attention: the Administration is turning up the heat on Harvard University, pushing it to adopt new policies around its patents. The Secretary of Commerce has told Harvard that the Federal Government wants a full accounting of all federal funds tied to the school’s extensive patent portfolio.
And it’s not stopping there. The Commerce Department is starting the “march-in” process under the Bayh-Dole Act. For those unfamiliar, this provision lets the Government grant third-party licenses—or even take ownership—if a university fails to timely disclose or elect title to inventions developed with federal funding.
Now, I’ll admit—I’m not a Bayh-Dole expert. But I do have some familiarity with a similar process through Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grants from the Department of Defense (DoD). These grants fund research for the DoD, and while companies can commercialize the resulting technology and patents, the Government keeps a royalty-free license to use that technology whenever it wants.
It’s a powerful position to be in. And in Harvard’s case, while the university may try to delay or fight this, I suspect the Government will ultimately prevail. After all, they paid for the research. And, as the old saying goes, he who has the gold makes the rules.
This situation should serve as a cautionary tale for any organization—whether a small startup or a major research university—thinking about taking federal money for research and development. Those dollars can be tempting, especially when you’re trying to bring a big idea to life. But they come with strings attached, and those strings can be pulled hard if the Government decides it’s in the public interest.
In other words: before you cash that federal check, make sure you’re comfortable with the long-term implications. Because once you take the money, you’re playing by their rules.
After a Long Hiatus, I’m Back to Blogging