Posted Apr 26, 2011 21:11 UTC (Tue) by david.a.wheeler
In reply to: Patent recourse via government redistribution
Parent article: A victory for the trolls
What I meant in my previous post was that if (1) a contractor takes government money to build something, and (2) the contractor patents an invention in the course of that contract, then the government typically gets a patent license to use it for government purposes.
For example, the stock clause
252.227-7038 "Patent RightsOwnership by the Contractor (Large Business)"
item (d)(2) says, "If the Contractor retains ownership of any subject invention, the Government shall have a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice, or have practiced for or on behalf of the United States, the subject invention throughout the world."
There are other clauses that may be used instead, depending on the circumstance, but let's use that one for now.
I hope that makes sense. Basically, if the government pays someone to do some work, then the government gets a number of rights on the result.
It's way more complicated that this; I'm trying to simplify something rather complicated. I am not a lawyer (IANAL)!
to post comments)