帮奶茶翻译的一份文案，吹牛说25页明天给的，但是，好像花了一个晚上就完成了1页……

原文在后面，有兴趣的可以帮我修正一下




拜杜法案：专利法案与技术商业化行为

概要

国会对增加美国技术发展能力的意愿最终形成了PT法案修改案（通常被称作拜杜法案，由两个发起人的名字命名）。通过这个法案给，那些政府支持或者其他单位的研发机构的发明将享有专利权，以此鼓励那些被各种机构研究出来的技术的商业化过程。

专利权给了企业经济上激励来保证将来发展和商业化。研究表明，1/4个研究基金是和新产品推向市场相关联的。专利通常被看作对了那些附加的，通常是大量的产生新产品和服务的投资的一种奖励。从学术定义上来说，拥有专利权通常被认为会对学校给其他私人机构发放许可来实现商业化有推动作用。

拜杜法案被认为是成功的。但是，当法案为联邦的研究机构扩大研发的作用定了一个大概的框架后，问题随着最近的安排渐渐出现。大部份人赞同工业、政府、学术界的核心组织更加能够增加预算（从私人或者公共单位）、加快技术转换、刺激形成更多的发明、发明新的产品、扩大市场。但是，同时也指出，这种合作也会导致冲突的加剧、研究方向的转移和减少学术成果的共享，对应用研究的重视而忽略基础研究。其他的内容也被添加近来，特别是国家和公共机构不会从专利中获利。

以前的经验指出公司并不能空时他们投资的结果，无论从拥有专利、发放许可还是控制价格的手段，好像不该聘请相关研究机构。重要的通过这个法案的优点，对那些公司里产生的知识产权的控制得到了加强。

这份报告会随着事情的发展而更新。

The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy

and the Commercialization of Technology

Summary

Congressional interest in facilitating technological innovation led to the passage of P.L. 96-517, Amendments to the Patent and Trademark Act (commonly referred to as the Bayh-Dole Act after its two main sponsors). The act grants patent rights to inventions arising out of government- sponsored research and development (R&D) to certain types of entities with the expressed purpose of encouraging the commercialization of new technologies through cooperative ventures between and among the research community, small business, and industry.

Patents provide an economic incentive for companies to pursue further development and commercialization. Studies have shown that research funding accounts for approximately one-quarter of the costs associated with bringing a new product to market. Patent ownership is seen as a way to encourage the additional, and often substantial investment necessary for generating new goods and services. In an academic setting, the possession of title to inventions is expected to provide motivation for the university to license the technology to the private sector for commercialization in expectation of royalty payments.

The Bayh-Dole Act has been seen as particularly successful in meeting its objectives. However, while the legislation provides a general framework to promote expanded utilization of the results of federally funded research and development, questions are being raised as to the adequacy of current arrangements. Most agree that closer cooperation among industry, government, and academia can augment funding sources (both in the private and public sectors), increase technology transfer, stimulate more innovation (beyond invention), lead to new products and processes, and expand markets. However, others point out that collaboration may provide an increased opportunity for conflict of interest, redirection of research, less openness in sharing of scientific discovery, and a greater emphasis on applied rather than basic research. Additional concerns have been expressed, particularly in relation to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, that the government and the public are not receiving benefits commensurate with the federal contribution to the initial research and development.

Actual experience and cited studies point to the conclusion that companies which do not control the results of their investments – either through ownership of patent title, exclusive license, or pricing decisions – tend to be less likely to engage in related R&D. The importance of control over intellectual property is reinforced by the positive effect P.L. 96-517 has had on the emergence of new technologies and techniques generated by companies.

This report will be updated as events warrant.