Inventions in Technology - PDF

							                          Technology Transfer: The History


How did technology transfer begin?
The concept of technology transfer originated in 1945. In “Science: The Endless Frontier,” an influential report
prepared for President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Vannevar Bush emphasized the importance of basic research to a strong
economy. Before 1940, little thought was given to the importance of technology. However, the value of
technological advances to a strong military defense was recognized during World War II. The emerging needs of the
U.S. military resulted in a large increase in government-sponsored research. Government facilities could not
accommodate all the R&D projects needed to fulfill U.S. military needs. The government began to contract with
qualified companies, universities, and nonprofit organizations, but with no overall plan for handling the intellectual
property that would be developed.

Each funding agency developed its own intellectual property policies. In time, there were more than 25 different
policies for dealing with intellectual property. In general, research institutions were unable to obtain title to their
inventions developed under federal funding and were unable to license their own technology. Although the
government licensed these inventions, technology transfer is usually more effective when conducted at the source of
the technology development. In addition, the government adopted a non-exclusive licensing policy. The result was
that very little technology was ever commercialized.

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy’s Science Advisor, Jerome B. Wiesner, recognized a need for a more uniform
policy on intellectual property. During the next ten years, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and then
the National Science Foundation entered into inter-institutional patent agreements with a few universities. These
agreements were the foundation for modern technology transfer. For the first time, universities were permitted to own
the inventions they made under government-funded research. This ownership and the ability to grant exclusive
licenses were instrumental in the willingness of private industry to license and develop university technology. The
terms and provisions of the agreements led to the passage in 1980 of Public Law 96-517, the Patent & Trademark Law
Amendment Act (Bayh-Dole Act). (See http://www.ucop.edu/ott/bayh.html and http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/bd/.)

The government has been and still is the primary source of the funds supporting basic research at universities. The
passage of the Bayh-Dole Act has enabled the transfer of government-funded inventions to the public for the benefit
of the U.S. economy and the nation as a whole. This is just what Vannevar Bush envisioned back in 1945.




              __________________________________________________________________________________

                               IPO MainTelephone (925) 422-6416 • website: https:/ipo.llnl.gov/
                                               UCRL-MI-210098 (3/14/05)
                                               Bayh-Dole Act


In 1980, Congress passed the Bayh-Dole Act (http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/bd/), the key piece of legislation
enabling technology transfer. In this law, Congress determined that private (not government) ownership of
inventions, motivated by the prospect of financial gain, would lead to commercialization of federally funded
inventions.

Prior to the Bayh-Dole Act, the government retained title to these inventions, but it was cumbersome for a company to
obtain a license. Consequently, few inventions were ever licensed and even fewer were commercialized.

As the economy has evolved from a manufacturing-based economy to a knowledge-based economy, and as that trend
continues, the role of university/national laboratory intellectual property will become increasingly important.
Academic institutions including the national laboratories are becoming focal points for economic development. Most
universities are establishing technology transfer programs.

Passage of the Bayh-Dole Act has resulted in the commercialization of federally funded technology and the
development of products that would not otherwise exist. Examples of LLNL active licenses include chromosome
painting, which has resulted in a series of cancer diagnostic kits available through Abbott Laboratories, and a unique
bio-analytical analysis technology used in two Cepheid products that can analyze DNA in less than 30 minutes. The
Cepheid devices are being used by the U.S. Postal Service to detect anthrax at its mail-sorting machines.

The Bayh-Dole Act has strengthened the U.S. economy and helped make the United States a world technology leader.
On December 14, 2002, The Economist published an article titled “Innovation’s Golden Goose,” declaring that the
Bayh-Dole Act was probably the most inspired piece of legislation in America over the past half-century. The article
further states: “More than anything, this single policy measure helped to reverse America’s precipitous slide into
industrial irrelevance.”




             __________________________________________________________________________________

                               IPO MainTelephone (925) 422-6416 • website: https://ipo.llnl.gov
                                               UCRL-MI-210098 (3/14/05)
                                     Stevenson-Wydler
                                 Technology Innovation Act


In addition to the Bayh Dole legislation, the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act (http://www.cuyamaca.net
/cuyamaca/academic/dept/envt/tech_transfer/3b-stevenson.htm) was the most significant legislation that enabled
technology transfer.

The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-480) established the foundation for
technology transfer at the national laboratories. A major focus was the dissemination of information from the Federal
government to private industry, and the establishment of an Office of Research and Technology Application (i.e.,
technology transfer office). Over the years, the legislation has been amended.

The Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-502) amended Stevenson-Wydler and mandated
technology transfer. The law requires Federal laboratories to actively seek opportunities to transfer technology to
industry, universities, and state and local governments. The Federal Technology Transfer Act also mandated
preference for U.S.-based businesses by requiring that preference be given to industrial partners that agreed to
manufacture in the United States. In addition, it chartered the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) as an
organization to promote technology transfer (www.federallabs.org).

Another significant amendment, The National Competitiveness Technology Transfer Act of 1989 (Public Law 101-
189), made technology transfer a mission of government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) laboratories and their
employees and enabled GOCOs to enter into cooperative research and development agreements (CRADAs). The
legislation further clarified the manner in which CRADAs are implemented.




             __________________________________________________________________________________

                              IPO MainTelephone (925) 422-6416 • website: https://ipo.llnl.gov/
                                              UCRL-MI-210098 (3/14/05)