In 1956 the then Attorney General Herbert Brownell warned that "present patent policy may well be one of the major factors tending to concentrate economic power." Mr. President, for many years I have felt that the problem of concentration in industry and the price-raising power associated with it, is one of the most serious problems facing the American economy. Yet the Government itself through policies like those of the Department of Defense, is accelerating this undesirable trend. If particular industries are able to achieve monopolistic prices for their products, the prices of many consumer goods will naturally be higher. A larger amount of purchasing power is thus extracted from consumers. Since consumers get less for more money, they are getting less goods in exchange for their own labor. In other words, these policies are helping to bring about lower real wages and salaries. In my previous speech I pointed out how $6 billion were being spent in ways which retard our national economic and scientific progress. I believe I have proved that these $6 billion are also an investment in creating monopolies rather than in breaking them. Furthermore, this type of policy is an impediment to social and economic justice. I feel that a sensible policy for the results of Government-financed research should have as its aims: (1) The maintenance and strengthening of our free, competitive enterprise system by making the results of Government research open to all our citizens instead of just a favored few; (2) The acceleration of our rate of economic and scientific growth by insuring the most rapid dissemination of new scientific and technical knowledge secured with Government funds; (3) And the eliminaton of immoral and undemocratic practices such as public taxation for private privilege. Mr. President, to that end I am introducing this bill, which I now send to the desk for appropriate reference and I request that the text thereof be published in the record. APPENDIX B Hon. JOHN L. MCCLELLAN, NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION, Chairman, Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR MCCLELLAN: In accordance with the suggestion made by Mr. Robert Wright, chief counsel to the subcommittee, to Mr. Charles B. Ruttenberg, Deputy General Counsel of the National Science Foundation, we are submitting this statement for the record in connection with the hearings of the subcommittee on S. 1084 and S. 1176. As you may recall, representatives of the National Science Foundation testified before the subcommittee on May 17, 1960. In my statement to the subcommittee of that date, I discussed, the patent policies of the National Science Foundation at some length. In that statement I pointed out that while, in many eases, the equities of the situation appeared to warrant retention by the Government of no greater rights than in irrevocable, royalty-free, nonexclusive license for use of the invention for governmental purposes, the Foundation would not hesitate to make different arrangements where particular circumstances appeared to warrant it. In this connection, on February 21, 1961, I issued a memorandum to the memberes of the senior staff of the National Science Foundation, a copy of which is enclosed herewith, which stated that the Foundation's activities in the field of weather modification research involved matters of such national significance that it would be assumed that the Government's interest in patent rights developed during the course of weather modification research supported by the Foundation was paramount, and that the Foundation, on behalf of the Government, would retain the right to determine the disposition of any patent rights arising in connection with the research, in the absence 14 "Report of the Attorney General on Research and Development," pursuant to sec. 708 (e) of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, Nov. 9, 1956, p. 42. of a showing that the equities of the grantee or contractor are such that the Government should waive all or a portion of these rights. Certain other steps were taken this past year by the Foundation with respect to patent matters. In a memorandum of August 16, 1960, I reminded the members of the senior staff of the Foundation that, in connection with contracts or other arrangements entered into by the Foundation, it is necessary to consider the patent possibilities and their relation to the public interest and any equities which the grantee or contractor may have, and to recommend, as appropriate, patent arrangements to meet particular circumstances. As an aid in reminding Foundation staff members of patent questions, the Foundation's grant and contract record, which is attached to each grant or contract being processed by the Foundation, is being revised to require that the appropriate staff member specifically indicate the type of patent clause that he recommends be used in connection withthe grant in question. As we mentioned to the subcommittee in the hearings last year, the Foundation, in certain other areas, such as our program to aid in the development of laboratory equipment for teaching purposes, has taken steps to retain substantially rights with respect to patentable inventions which may arise in connection with such activities and any income which may derive therefrom. One of the bills being considered by the subcommittee, S. 1084, states that the United States shall have exclusive right and title to any invention made by any person in the performance of any obligation arising from any contract or lease executed or grant made by or on the behalf of the United States. The other bill under consideration, S. 1176, would establish a Federal Inventions Administration to administer the proprietary rights of the United States with respect to scientific and technical information obtained, and inventions made, through the expenditure of public funds. Under the provisions of S. 1176, the United States would retain title to any inventions made during the performance of contracts or grants made by the U.S. Government, except that the administration could waive such rights under certain specified circumstances. S. 1176 also provides for acquisition of title to inventions made by officers or employees of the United States. In view of the fact that the National Science Foundation does not operate any laboratories or pilot plants and, therefore, that no Foundation employees are engaged in the conduct of scientific research, those portions of the legislation pertaining to inventions made by Government employees would appear to lie outside the scope of the Foundation's responsibilities. Our comments, therefore, will be confined to the other aspects of the legislation before the subcommittee. As a general matter, we do not believe that requirement of Federal title in all cases, as proposed in S. 1084, would be an appropriate or practicable Federal patent policy. We feel that flexibility in this area is highly important and that there should be room, as proposed in S. 1176, for the equities of each case to be considered. Circumstances will undoubtedly arise which warrant retention of all or a portion of the patent rights by the contractor or grantee in particular cases. Our view with respect to legislation such as that proposed in S. 1084 and S. 1176 is in accord with a statement made by the Comptroller General of the United States which I quoted in my comments to the committee last May, and which I would like to repeat. The Comptroller General said: "In lieu of establishing one uniform policy, consideration might be given to legislation which would give recognition to the functions and problems peculiar to the activities of individual agencies, as well as the differences in the types of research and development being contracted for by the Government. Such legislation might appropriately set forth broad general policies, including basic principles, guidelines, and criteria, permitting a measure of flexibility in administration where circumstances so dictate, and might embrace some features of the present administrative practices and methods." One of the considerations which has created considerable difficulty in connection with the administration of Government-owned patents is that there has been no procedure established for licensing such patents on an exclusive, or other limited, basis. It has been said, therefore, that some inventions are not developed because of the absence of protection to the organization undertaking the development work. Under S. 1176, the proposed Federal Inventions Administration could make such arrangements. We feel that such authority would aid materially in helping to solve some of the problems relating to Government patent policies. One of the main concerns we have with legislation such as that proposed in S. 1176 is the fact that the Federal Inventions Administration would have to consider all contracts or grants made by the various Federal agencies (except where a waiver is granted for particular classes of inventions). The amount of administration required, in view of the very great number of grants and contracts entered into by Federal agencies which theoretically may have patent implications, would appear to be very great, and we feel there is a serious question as to whether one agency should be required to assume such a broad responsibility. Not only would substantial administrative effort be required, but it would appear that Government contracting and grant activities would be slowed considerably by such a requirement. On the other hand, a Federal Inventions Administration, which would have as its mission the administration of Government-owned patent rights acquired by the various Federal agencies might have considerable value, although we are not certain that an independent agency for this purpose, rather than a unit in one of the existing agencies, would be the most appropriate means for carrying on such an activity. S. 1176 would also direct the proposed Federal Inventions Administration to conduct extensive activities with respect to the dissemination of scientific and technical information. The authority contained therein is extremely broad and appears to be coextensive with authority now possessed by the Department of Commerce, exercised through the Office of Technical Services of the Department, to release such information to industry and the public. The National Science Foundation, in connection with its responsibility to foster the interchange of scientific information among scientists in the United States and foreign countries, has worked closely with the Office of Technical Services, as well as with other Government agencies, in a sustained effort to strengthen their information services to the scientific community and to the public generally. Grants have been made to the Office of Technical Services to enable it to expand its announcement of Government technical reports, particularly those containing basic research information. Financial assistance has also been provided to the Science and Technology Division of the Library of Congress for continued expansion of its catalogs of Government reports. This support has permitted the Division's Reports Reference Center to perform more comprehensive literature searches and to provide a higher quality reference service for an increasing number of users. In fiscal year 1961, the Department of Commerce and the Library of Congress budgeted for these two activities which had been initially supported by the Foundation. The Foundation has also communicated with both the former and the newly designated Commissioners of Patents concerning the role of the Patent Office in the dissemination of scientific and technological information, especially as it relates to new discoveries. The Patent Office has the resources to make major contributions to the dissemination of scientific and technological information, particularly to the industrial community. Any effort directed to the exploitation of this potential should be strongly encouraged. Such an effort by the Patent Office could, among other things, result in the faster dissemination of information on new developments and the greater dissemination of foreign patent information. For these reasons, we believe that the scientific information responsibilities proposed for the Federal Inventions Administration in S. 1176 might more appropriately be continued in the Department of Commerce through the Office of Technical Services and the Patent Office. In this connection, in my statement to the subcommittee last year, I mentioned that the Foundation has been reviewing the science information activities of the various Federal agencies, including agency policies regarding the reporting and dissemination of scientific and technical information resulting from research and development work. I pointed out that if a general governmentwide scientific information problem exists in connection with federally supported research and development activities, we believe it would be appropriate for the Foundation to attempt to develop recommendations to alleviate the situation. Our studies with respect to the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are still underway. If, after these studies have been completed, a significant problem appears to exist, we feel that a major survey of the entire situation would be necessary in order to determine the extent of the problem and possible ways of dealing with it. We appreciate the opportunity you have afforded us to express our views on the legislation before the subcommittee. The Bureau of the Budget has advised us it has no objections to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours, ALAN T. WATERMAN, Director. APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF ADM. L. D. COATES, CHIEF OF NAVAL RESEARCH, on THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE NAVY'S BASIC RESEARCH PROGRAM Mr. Chairman, in my prepared statement at page 6 I stated that the size and complexity of the Navy's research program, in which this committee has expressed an interest, is such that I wish to submit additional detailed information with respect to basic research in the Navy. In the following pages I have therefore discussed each field of scientific research which the Navy supports, together with its relationship to Navy requirements, and to fields of research conducted by nonmilitary Government agencies. EARTH SCIENCES The earth sciences include acoustics, oceanography, atmospheric physics, meteorology, earth physics, seismology, geomagnetism, gravity, geodesy, geography, arctic research, remote sensing of environment, and astronomy. The primary results of this research are environmental data, detailed knowledge of the theories concerning the conditions and processes active in all parts of the earth, its oceans, its atmosphere (the elements in which the fleet operates), the relation of the earth to the solar system and the universe, and a reservoir of trained scientists sympathetic to Navy needs. Acoustics is a vitally important subject to the Navy and a continuing demand exists for trained people and more basic knowledge to build a sound technology of underwater acoustics. Cooperative and coordinated research by Dr. M. Junger, Cambridge Acoustical Associates, Dr. F. DiMaggio, Columbia University, and Dr. J. G. Greenspon, J. G. Engineering Associates, has provided an analytical solution for radiation from finite shells in water. The solutions for particular shapes are now being coded for computer analysis. Such solutions will be valuable in the analysis of sound radiated from submarines. The National Science Foundation supports some research (6 to 10 university projects) in acoustics, but the Navy program (30 university and industry proj ects) is both more comprehensive and directed to Navy interest. An example of a commercial product developed under the program is the piezoelectric ceramic known as PZT-5 developed by Clevite Corp. This material is used to construct hydrophones for underwater use, largely but not entirely for Navy ASW applications. Oceanography supports a large part (50 to 90 percent) of the research at some 15 institutions and universities. The principal institutions are Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and Lamont Geological Observatory of Columbia University. Nearly all the leading oceanographers including Columbus Iselin, Roger Revelle, Maurice Ewing, Walter Munk, and Brackett Hersey participate in the program. At each of these institutions the National Science Foundation and the Atomic Energy Commission support some phases of the research program. The Since most of the Navy support for oceanographic research has been directed toward basic studies rather than instrumentation or equipment development, the amount of commercial benefit that has resulted is difficult to evaluate. most direct use of developments which were largely the result of Navy support is in the field of wave forecasting. Several consulting firms on the west and gulf coasts use these techniques to provide wave forecasting services for the petroleum and shipping industry. Other firms use the ship routing techniques which were largely the result of Navy research to provide ship routing for commercial vessels. The rise of the American yellowfin tuna fishery in the past 2 years from a marginal to a prosperous fishery which is now able to utilize the available stocks to their maximum sustainable yield, owes its success to improved purse seining techniques partially attributed to the Navy's oceanographic research. The charts of the seasonal thermocline depth and surface temperature compiled by the U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office provided the data needed to insure that the nets were constructed to fish to the proper depth and aided in the seasonal selection of areas. A program of basic research in atmospheric physics and meteorology is supported to obtain a better understanding of the thermodynamics, energy transmission, and circulation of the atmosphere. The ultimate aim of the research is improved weather forecasting and possibly ultimate weather modification, Weather forecasting at sea is complicated by the absence of weather observatories and requires special competence and skills. Examples of important research projects include the work of Drs. Vonnegut and Moore of Arthur D. Little, Inc. on thunderstorm electrification, of Dr. J. G. Charney of Massachusetts Institute of Technology on computed meteorological forecasts of Drs. McDonald and Kassander of the University of Arizona on cloud physics and of Dr. Malkus of Woods Hole on dynamics of giant tropical clouds. Nonmilitary organizations supporting research in this field include the National Science Foundation, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Weather Bureau. Data and concepts developed under Government-sponsored research in atmospheric physics and meteorology are utilized by private weather consultants and "rainmakers." Some patentable instruments have resulted directly or indirectly from such research. In the field of earth physics the fundamental objective is to determine, and understand the behavior of, the physical and chemical properties of the solid earth, and to relate this knowledge to such Navy applications as improved navigation, guidance systems for missiles, determination of atomic weapons effects, and the possible detection of surreptitious nuclear explosions. Research in this field is also supported by the Atomic Energy Commission, the National Science Foundation, the Geological Survey, and the Coast and Geodetic Survey. Some patentable instruments result directly or indirectly from this research. Concepts and techniques developed are used by petroleum and mining companies in search for natural resources. Improvement in forecasting earthquakes is another potential of this research. Some examples of significant projects are marine gravity investigations by Dr. L. B. Slicter, University of California, Los Angeles, oscillations of the earth by Dr. C. L. Pekeris, Weizmann Institute, and deep seismic investigations by Dr. M. A. Tuve, Carnegie Institution of Washington. Astronomy is fostered by the Navy in fulfillment of its responsibilities for standard time and navigational aids. Current developments in missiles, satellites, and space science increases both the demand and the means for expansion of astronomical research. Two recent breakthroughs in method have resulted from ONR-supported research. By special measurements of stellar radiation Dr. Bengt Strömgren of the Institute for Advanced Study has been able to derive more precisely than ever before the distances and ages of stars. He is applying the technique to problems of structure and evolution of our galaxy. Dr. W. W. Morgan, director of Yerkes Observatory, University of Chicago, has discovered a new relationship between the form of a galaxy and the type of star predominating in its population. Applying this technique to galaxies over extended regions of the universe he has derived new insight on the origin and evolution of the universe. The National Science Foundation and the National Aeronautics and Space Agency support research in this field. The geography program supports research designed to provide the Navy with fundamental information on the critical environment of the world, to improve the means of acquiring and analyzing environmental information and to enlarge the manpower resource of specialists on critical areas of the world. Examples of important projects include the work of Dr. Richard J. Russell, Louisiana State University on the geomorphology of coasts and beaches, Dr. Reid A. Bryson, University of Wisconsin on aerial sensing of environment, Dr. C. W. Thornthwaite, Laboratory of Climatology on topoclimatology, and Drs. Phil Church and Clifford A. Barns, University of Washington who direct a program of research on drifting ice floe stations on the Arctic Ocean. The latter project by supplying data on synoptic weather, drift and condition of the sea ice, and depth and properties of the sea water demonstrated the feasibility of submarine operations under the pack ice and contributes to the safety of operation of both submarines and surface ships in the Arctic. Potentially the research program will also contribute to antisubmarine warfare in arctic waters. MATERIAL SCIENCES Materials have recently assumed a position of preeminence and are perhaps the most important factor upon which the advance of technology depends. Programs in undersea warfare, space flight, automation, electronics, and utilization of atomic energy are dependent upon the solution of crucial materials problems. |