US PTO rules against Univ of California, argues that Broad Inst invented CRISPR
Only somewhat on-topic, but this is the latest in a long line of cases which transfer IP from universities to corporations on various grounds.<p>For a particularly representative previous example, see Stanford v Roche [1], in which SCOTUS found that a patent originated with the individual researcher and not his institution, and was therefore transferrable to other private entities with whom the researcher had agreements.<p>I, for one, believe that we should enact stronger protections to ensure that research partially performed at publicly-funded labs remains in the hands of the public. In particular, I think that the Bayh–Dole Act should be strengthened to vest the patent with the institution directly, and to create a default presumption that the institution owns the IP.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_University_v._Roche_Molecular_Systems,_Inc" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_University_v._Roche_M...</a>.