these to industrial organizations, to be filled in by representatives of those organizations and returned to the study group for consideration and analysis. It was also believed to be essential by the study group to obtain information by personal visit and interviews. It finally became clear, however, to all members of the study group that it would be necessary to obtain the assistance of some outside group or organization in order to accomplish in a businesslike and effective manner the distribution of the questionnaires, the development of facts by personal visit, and the careful analysis and evaluation of the facts which were obtained by these means. This was because each of the members of the study group was fully employed in performing other required duties, the group had no staff and funds to support one were not available. Consideration was given to the possibility of securing funds from some governmental source, with the approval of the Bureau of the Budget, for the employment of an outside organization capable of performing the investigative functions thought to be necessary. Representatives of the Bureau of the Budget were consulted and gave their advice, which advice was in confirmation of the views of the study group with respect to the need to employ outside help. It was ultimately determined, however, by the unanimous vote of the members of the study group, that the Patent, Trademark, & Copyright Foundation of the George Washington University should be consulted to determined whether or not that foundation was equipped to conduct a research study of the type deemed to be necessary. Meetings with the president of the University, who is also the director of the foundation, were arranged, and the subject discussed at length. The University authorities agreed that such a study would be an appropriate one for the foundation to undertake, provided that it could publish the results when the study had been concluded. A definite proposal was drawn up by officials of the foundation and presented to the study group for consideration. The proposal was approved by the study group and it was recommended that the representatives on the study group of the General Services Administration draft a letter of acceptance to be transmitted by General Services Administration to the foundation, a contractual relationship to thus be established. This was done and a definite agreement between General Services Administration and the foundation is in this manner being established. A copy of the proposal forwarded by the foundation to GSA is attached, marked "Exhibit B." (See p. 172.) The work of the foundation in conducting the study is to commence promptly and it is hoped that it will be concluded with the least possible delay. The extent of the investigation to be conducted is of course limited, funds not being available for a more comprehensive study, but it is hoped that, as a result of the work which will be done under the authorization from General Services Administration much significant information will be obtained and extent of any necessary additional study made clear. As previously explained, the membership of the study group was augmented during the progress of its work and final meetings were attended by representatives of the following agencies: John C. Green, Department of Commerce; Howard C. H. Williamson (succeeding Ray M. Harris), Department of Defense; Dan E. Weatherly, Jr., Department of the Navy; William G. Colman, National Science Foundation; William J. Lamont (substituting for Julius Renninger, deceased), Department of Justice; Eugene J. Davidson, Small Business Administration; Roland A. Anderson, Atomic Energy Commission; Ralph P. Dunn, Department of the Air Force; T. Hayward Brown, Department of Justice; Capt. Robert A. Fitch (succeeded Captain Robillard, retired), Office of Naval Research; Edward J. Rourke, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Gerald D. O'Brien, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Observers: George G. Mullins, Bureau of the Budget; Messrs. Paul Barron and Phil W. Jordan, General Services Administration. The study group is still of the opinion that the mission which it is charged to accomplish, i.e., the reevaluation of existing practices governing the division of patent rights between research and development contractors and the Government, can best be accomplished by determining how the pursuit in the past of their several policies, by the various agencies of Government, has resulted. When the findings of the Patent, Trademark & Copyright Foundation have been submitted, they will be promptly given the most careful consideration and such recommendations as would then appear to be appropriate will be transmitted to 49646-60-12 the General Services Administration. Until that time the study group cannot go further in advising the Administration. (Following are exhibits accompanying Mr. Watson's statement.) EXHIBIT VI (A) Memo re patent policy-Government agencies Subject: Patent policy-Government agencies. Responses to Commissioner Watson's letters of August 22, 1957, and September 19, 1957, and other oral requests for information concerning Government agency patent policy have been received up to this time, as follows: Agriculture, Department of COMMENTS OF AGENCY Patentable results of research to be made available to the public through dedication, assignment to the Secretary, publication, or such other means as the contracting officer shall determine. Titles to inventions vested in U.S. Government; nearly all patents assigned to Secretary of Agriculture. Atomic Energy Commission Basic provisions in atomic energy research and development contracts permit Commission to acquire the rights and interests in all inventions made under the terms of a research contract. Details set forth in chapter 9113 of AEC Manual. Census, Bureau of the No present policy; only recently authorized to enter into research contracts. Civil Aeronautics Administration Uses patent-rights clause specified in section 9-107 (c) of Armed Services Procurement Regulations; CAA Technical Development Center uses a special clause under which the contractor agrees to give a nonexclusive irrevocable license to use any invention resulting from the development work performed under the contract. Coast and Geodetic Survey No development contracts (Commissioner Watson's note to file, Aug. 27, 1957). Defense, Department of Requires, generally, royalty-free license to Government; contractor retains title to patent and right to collect royalties on commercial production. Federal Communications Commission No contracts. Federal Power Commission No contracts. General Services Administration Letter August 5, 1957, from Mr. Franklin G. Floete, relative to organization of a Government contract patent policy study group, notes present policy as being "in general *** the Government getting a nonexclusive royalty-free license to use any patentable invention arising out of Governmentfinanced research and development work performed by contractors and the contractor obtaining ownership of patent rights on any invention conceived in the course of performance of the work under the contract." Government Printing Office No contracts. Health, Education, and Welfare, Department of Results of research, in general, to be made freely available to Government, to science, industry, and the general public. Housing and Home Finance Agency Letter October 1, 1957, acknowledges request for report, and indicates statement will be submitted. Report received December 27, 1957, (See p. 4.) Interior, Department of the Assignment to Government required, but if not secured then cooperative agreement (1) provides for license to Government and (2) an undertaking to make the invention available to the public through nonexclusive, nondiscriminatory licenses at reasonable royalty rates. Further details in letter September 23, 1957. Justice, Department of No acknowledgement of request for report dated August 22, 1957. Report October 24, 1957: no present contracts. Labor, Department of Letter, September 26, 1957, indicates Department has no contracts which might give rise to question of patent rights. Maritime Administration No specific measures for protection of Government's interest in patent rights prior to activities dealing with creation of a nuclear-powered cargo vessel. In the field of nuclear applications, protective clauses now used by AEC have been incorporated into contracts. General Counsel's office examines each contract relating to research and development and adheres to the general policy that the Government should receive full benefit from any patent rights stemming directly from research financed by Maritime Administration. National Science Foundation Domestic rights may be protected by institution doing research work, with a royalty-free, nonexclusive license to the Government; NSF reserves right to determine disposition of foreign rights Post Office Department In general, follows patent provisions contained in Armed Services Procurement Regulations, with certain exceptions. Exceptions specified in letter of October 17, 1957. Public Roads, Bureau of No definite policy with respect to division of patent rights between Government and contractor. Standards, Bureau of NBS obtains an option to purchase a license for inventions made by contractor before entering into contract; Government obtains an irrevocable royalty-free license on inventions developed under contract; and, an assignment as to those inventions for which patent applications are not filed by contractor. State, Department of No contracts. Tennessee Valley Authority No outside contracts. Employees do research in fertilizer field. Treasury Department No contracts. Veterans' Administration Contractor decides which of two alternate articles shall be included in research and development contract. So-called short form calls for outright assignment to Government; long form provides that Government shall have irrevocable, nonexclusive, nontransferable and royalty-free license, with a variety of details. Weather Bureau No research work involving mechanical devices; existing contracting proce dures stipulate that Government shall have nonexclusive license to manufacture or cause to be manufactured any invention for its own use. Housing and Home Finance Agency Research contracts authorized under several laws administered by Agency; generally, results of research are required to be made available to the public though dedication, assignment to the Government, etc., but in one instance contracts contain no provision for division of patent rights between the public and the Government. Constituent agencies, FHA, Public Housing Administration, etc., either negotiate contracts containing no provision for division of patent rights, or have no contracts involving research by contractors. EXHIBIT VI (B) NOVEMBER 23, 1959. Mr. FRANKLIN G. FLOETE, Administrator, General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. FLOETE: Following discussions of some months, I have been asked to submit a proposal under which the George Washington University would undertake, through its Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Foundation, to make a study on the subject of Federal patent policies in connection with Governmentfinanced research and development contracts. This study has been recommended by Commissioner Robert C. Watson, of the U.S. Patent Office, and by the Interagency Study Group of which he is Chairman. As I unerstand it, that study group was established by you as a result of an assignment by the White House to the Feneral Services Administration for study of the November 1956 report of the Attorney General to the President and Congress concerning Government contract patent policies. The Attorney General's report dealt with the possible tendency of some of these patent polices to contribute to economic concentrations in industry. As a result of discussion with Commisioner Watson and members of his study group, as representatives of GSA associated with the Interagency Task Force, of which the study group is an adjunct, we have developed the attached proposal dated August 5, 1959. You will note that the research proposal contemplates a study which is somewhat broader than the more specific question posed by the Attorney General. This was based upon the conclusion of the study group that the narrower question should be considered in a somewhat broader perspective, as reflected in our research proposal. As you know from other studies which have been performed for the Government and for GSA, we do not attempt to spell out every detail in our proposal, and we depend, as does the Government, on informal meetings at the inception of and during the course of the performance of the research to work out details. The Foundation follows the practice of publishing reports of its projects in the Foundation's Journal to which a copyright automatically applies upon publication. It is my understanding that you have no objection to our following this practice in connection with this study so long as the Government is given, without limitation, complete right to publish, have published, or authorize publication of this study. Accordingly, the Government's right so to do is made a part of this proposal. The university understands that this proposal is subject to the provisions of the standard Government contract clauses relating to contingent fees (FPR 1–1. 503); nondiscrimination in employment (FPR 1-7.001-18); examination of records (FPR 1-7.101-10); officials not to benefit (FPR 1-7.101-19); convict labor (FPR 1-7.101-15); and disputes (FPR 1-7.101-12). The George Washington University represents that it has not employed or retained any company or person other than a full time bona fide employee, working solely for the George Washington University, to solicit or secure this contract; that it it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person other than the full time bona fide employee, working solely for the George Washington University, any fee, commission, percentage, or brokerage fee contingent upon or resulting from the award of this contract; and agrees to furnish information relating to the subject matter as requested by the Government. This proposal, including the cost estimate on which the contract price of $28,283.50 is based, has been prepared consistent with the university's standard practices in connection with performance of Government-financed research work. It is understood that payments will be made in equal monthly payments as the study progresses. Very truly yours, Name and address of institution: The Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Foundation of the George Washington University, Washington, D.C. Name of principal investigator: Dr. Donald Stevenson Watson. Title of proposal: Federal patent policies in contracts for research and development. Description of proposed research. THE PROBLEM Within the many circles, both public and private, that are concerned with the operation of the patent system, there has arisen the question as to whether the public interest is best served by the several patent policies now being followed by federal agencies contracting for R. & D. The foundation has the facilities and the disinterested position to conduct research leading to answers to the problem. As the foundation now sees it, the problem is to examine the implications of Federal patent policies and to evaluate them in the light of a carefully specified concept of the public interest. The Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Foundation of the George Washington University is the only university organization that is dedicated to a systematic empirical study of the role of the American patent system, including trademarks and copyrights.1 The foundation approaches its task of appraising our patent system from many directions with a research staff of different skills and interests. The staff includes economists, psychologists, lawyers specializing in patent matters and other professional people who participate in the planning and general conduct of the foundation's research. All research plans are formulated in conformity with policies agreed upon by the Advisory Council (see pp. 9-10 of the bulletin) and subject to the general guidance of the director and the executive director. The latter devotes all his time to the work of the foundation with the aid of a full-time staff of six (see bulletin) and a varying number of part-time student help. As in the case of many other studies for which the foundation office serves as a base, the executive director is not only available for administrative duties connected with the study but also for guidance and advice on the legal aspects. A few members of the research staff not specifically connected with the study may be asked occasionally for opinions and suggestions on various aspects in which they have special competence. THE SETTING OF THE PROBLEM The foundation proposes to analyze the problem in the period since 1950. The problem must be placed in its larger setting, so that among other things a framework for economic analysis can be erected. The setting of the problem is the growth of Federal-financed R. & D. This is to be analyzed by industry, by product, by agency, and by patent policy. This part of the analysis will show what industries and what products have been covered by the various patent policies. The material which has already been gathered by the Commissioner of Patents as Chairman of the Patent Policy Study Group (No. 14) (established in connection with the Interagency Procurement Task Force), as well as other Government reports or publications, will be fully utilized. The study will be limited to certain aspects of three topics: (1) Implications of patent policies for contractors, (2) for Government agencies, and (3) for the public interest. 1 "The Research Program of the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Foundation," the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Journal of Research and Education, vol. 1, No. 2, December 1957, pp. 175-184. See also art. III of the declaration of trust (copy enclosed). 2 See the Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Foundation, the George Washington University, "Bulletin 1959-60" (copy enclosed). |