What does it mean for a patent to be subject to the provisions of Public Law 96-517?
<p>Some NASA patents make reference to Public Law 96-517, using wording like this:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The invention described herein was made in the performance of work
  under a NASA contract, and is subject to the provisions of Public Law
  96-517 (35 USC 202) under which the inventors were granted a request
  to retain title.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>(Source: <a href="https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20080012292" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20080012292</a>)</p>

<p>What does this mean in practical terms? <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title35/html/USCODE-2011-title35-partII-chap18.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Law 96-517</a> appears to be part of something coloquially called the  "Bayh-Dole Act", the contents of which seems to refer to being made in the spirit of fostering free enterprise:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>It is the policy and objective of the Congress to use the patent
  system to promote the utilization of inventions arising from federally
  supported research or development; to encourage maximum participation
  of small business firms in federally supported research and
  development efforts; to promote collaboration between commercial
  concerns and nonprofit organizations, including universities; to
  ensure that inventions made by nonprofit organizations and small
  business firms are used in a manner to promote free competition and
  enterprise without unduly encumbering future research and discovery;
  to promote the commercialization and public availability of inventions
  made in the United States by United States industry and labor; to
  ensure that the Government obtains sufficient rights in federally
  supported inventions to meet the needs of the Government and protect
  the public against nonuse or unreasonable use of inventions; and to
  minimize the costs of administering policies in this area.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This very long sentence seems to loosely imply that small business, not-for-profits and educational institutions will be able to utilise the inventions described in these patents, but I'm only guessing. I'm also interested in what this means for residents, businesses and institutions operating outside of the United States.</p>

<p>There's an overview of Bayh-Dole <a href="https://www.mofo.com/resources/news/the-governments-patent-policy-the-bayh-dole-act-and-authorization-and-consent.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.   Here's what I understand from that.</p>

<p>So NASA apparently contracted with a company called Voicecraft to do some work, and in the course of that work, Voicecraft employees Davidson and Gerson invented a "vector excitation coder", whatever that may be.  Now prior to 1980, the policy in such a case would have been that the invention should belong to the public, since taxpayer dollars paid for the work, and that it should not be patented.</p>

<p>The Bayh-Dole Act changed that, and said that when the contractor was a small business or a nonprofit, and various other conditions were met, then the contractor would be allowed to patent the invention, and keep ownership of that patent for itself ("retain title").  Presumably this was meant as an added incentive for such organizations to take government contracts, and perhaps charge the government less for the work, since they could potentially make extra money by licensing the patent.  In 1983 this was expanded (interestingly by Presidential memorandum, and not by amending the law) to cover all government research contractors, not only small businesses and nonprofits.</p>

<p>So, since the Voicecraft invention was in the late 1980s, the expanded act applied, and Voicecraft was allowed to patent the vector excitation coder.  <a href="https://patents.google.com/patent/US4868867A/en?oq=US+patent+4%2c868%2c867" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here</a> is the patent they were granted.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>This very long sentence seems to loosely imply that small business, not-for-profits and educational institutions will be able to utilise the inventions described in these patents, but I'm only guessing.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>On the contrary.  While the patent was in effect, <strong>nobody</strong> was allowed to use the invention unless they could make a deal with Voicecraft to license the patent.  That's how patents work.  The one exception was the federal government itself, which under the Bayh-Dole Act would be guaranteed the right to use the invention for its own purposes.</p>

<p>As to the effect on people using the invention outside the US, I don't know.  See the comments for some other users' thoughts.</p>

<p>It looks like the patent expired in 2007, so now anyone can use this particular design.</p>

patents