Martensen IP Offers Valuable Insights on Best Practices for Protecting Your IP from Hidden Risks in Government Contracts
Your SBIR Phase proposal and how (or by whom) your IP is crafted might grant the government more rights than intended. Learn how specific language and developmental approaches can jeopardize your intellectual property and future commercialization efforts.
The Hidden Risk in Government Contracts
Securing a Phase II or III SBIR award is a significant achievement. However, many companies unknowingly jeopardize their intellectual property (IP) rights through the language used in their proposals and how they produce their deliverables. What seems like standard, or 'boilerplate' text can inadvertently grant the government extensive rights, potentially diminish the value of your innovations, and deter future investors or acquirers. And managing risk using 1099s or independent contractors can lead to a loss of control of future opportunities.
Understanding Government IP Rights
In government contracts, the rights the government obtains to IP depend largely on prior assertions of your rights, what you have agreed to deliver, and the specific terms outlined in the contract. The primary categories of government rights include:
Unlimited rights. The government can use, disclose, reproduce, and distribute technical data or software in any manner and for any purpose. This typically applies when the government fully funds development (DoD) or development was accomplished in performance of the contract (non-DoD)*.
Government purpose rights. The government can use, disclose, reproduce, and distribute the technical data or software within the government without restriction and can share it with other contractors but only for government purposes. This applies when development is funded by a mix of government and private funds under defense contracts (DoD).
Limited/Restricted rights. The government can use the technical data or software within the government but cannot disclose it to third parties without permission. This usually applies when the development is entirely funded at private expense (DoD) or developed not in performance of the contract. (non-DoD)
SBIR data rights. Under a SBIR/STTR award, the government gains limited and restricted rights in the data and software delivered. These rights last for 20 years, after which the government's rights become unlimited.
The Proposal Becomes the Contract
A critical aspect often overlooked is that the proposal you submit can become an integral part of the contract. Terms and descriptions used in the proposal are often incorporated by reference or copied directly into the contract, making them legally binding. Simply put, the government contract usually accepts exactly what is offered.
Common Pitfalls in Proposal Language
Overly broad descriptions. Providing detailed technical data without appropriate restrictions can lead to unintended rights being granted.
Lack of proper markings. Failing to assert and mark proprietary information correctly can result in the government assuming broader rights than intended.
Inconsistent terminology. All the words used in a proposal should be selected carefully, but in the world of IP certain terms are particularly important. Government rights in IP are tied to the use of these words. Using terms like 'develop' or 'create' in a proposal without understanding their contractual implications can be detrimental. Recognize that Phase III refers to work that derives from, extends, or completes an effort made under prior SBIR/STTR Funding Agreements. Matching prior terminology on prior SBIR/STTR grants on a Phase III proposal ensures IP rights are maintained.
Subcontractor Missteps
A common mistake is taking steps to minimize cost that increases risk. Small companies are typically cash-poor. To be efficient, hirings are minimized, and contractual help is maximized. Resources are engaged on an 'as needed' basis, and independent contractors and 1099s are common. The government, however, looks at independent contractors and 1099s differently. From the government's perspective, an independent contractor or 1099 is a subcontractor, and a subcontractor, not the prime, possesses (owns) the IP. Lacking correct wording in everyone's working agreement, the company may not actually control the IP. And the government may be looking at awarding a Phase III contract to your independent contractor, not you.
Best Practices for Protecting Your IP
Safeguard Your Innovation
The language used in your SBIR proposal and worker agreements is not just a formality; it's a critical component that can define the future of your intellectual property and the value of your company. By understanding the implications and taking proactive steps, you can protect your innovations and maintain their commercial value.
Ready To Ensure Your IP Is Protected?
Schedule a free 30-minute consultation with our experienced IP attorneys to review your proposal and safeguard your intellectual property rights.
Book Your Free Consultation!
Martensen specializes in intellectual property (IP) strategies for the identification, protection, and monetization of IP, particularly with respect to government contracts, providing deep expertise in SBIR/STTR programs, defense tech, and dual-use commercialization.
*Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) govern non-DoD and DoD rights, respectively.
About Martensen IP
At the intersection of business, law and technology, Martensen understands the tools of IP. Martensen knows the business of IP. We understand the tech market, especially when the government is a customer, and we know how to plan, assess, and adjust. Patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, licenses are our tools.
https://www.martensenip.com
Martensen IP Media Contact
Source: Story.KISSPR.com
Release ID: 1682734
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump, Carney to speak soon, Canadian official says
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney will likely talk "over the next number of days" after the U.S. imposed a 35% tariff on goods not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, a Canadian official said on Sunday. Dominic LeBlanc, the federal cabinet minister in charge of U.S.-Canada trade, told CBS News' "Face the Nation" that he believes there is an option of striking a deal that will bring down tariffs. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Women call the shots across the supply chain at tequila brand 1953
Listen and subscribe to The Big Idea on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. When Shivam Mallick Shah and Lindsey Davis Stover founded the tequila brand 1953, they wanted to make moves in an industry that was becoming increasingly popular among their own demographic while also opening doors for other women. As the brand proudly states on its website, 1953 is "Founded, Farmed, Distilled, and Led by Women." On Yahoo Finance's The Big Idea podcast, the two entrepreneurs shared how they managed to pull off such a feat in a historically male-dominated industry. (Watch the full episode above; listen-only below.) "I just kind of got down this rabbit hole of where the women in tequila are, unfortunately, really hard to find. So that kind of led us to this idea," Davis Stover, a Texas native, said on the podcast. "We were drinking tequila. Every woman we knew is drinking tequila," she continued. "So we wanted to create a company that was founded, farmed, distilled, and led by women at every single level. Even our name, 1953, is the year women earned the right to vote in Mexico. I think that is just the essence of our company and providing opportunities for women." This embedded content is not available in your region. "People didn't think it was necessary to have a female-led supply chain," Shah said. "They didn't think that it would make a difference in the quality of the product, and they didn't think that, frankly, we could do it. They had a lot of strong opinions on what we could do, and it was different than what we wanted to do." Shah and Davis Stover tackled their mission by completing their search in an "organic way," talking with people who worked at distilleries and farms in Mexico. Eventually, they found Carmen and Adriana, who ran the family-owned distillery that 1953 would eventually use. "Their family has owned this distillery for over a hundred years, and they have trained a female master distiller, Rocio Rodriguez, who signs every bottle," Shah explained. "She had this incredible story of having come to this distillery when she was pregnant. She was trained as a chemical engineer, but she was worried about losing her job. Carmen and Adriana's families decided to build a nursery so she could come to work and bring her whole self, which has, of course, changed her life, but it changed so many people's lives." Though their journey to creating a brand with a strong female focus had its roadblocks, the biggest hurdle was finding a woman-owned agave farm. Traditionally, agave farms in Mexico are passed down from father to son, but Carmen and Adriana helped the entrepreneurs find the farm they partner with today. "We could not find an agave farm owned by women," Shah said. "Carmen and Adriana helped us find a gentleman who only had four daughters. We met with them, and we talked about what we were trying to build. We asked him if he would consider passing his farm down to his daughters if we guaranteed purchase of agave from their farms for 1953." After a family meeting in which the four women discussed the proposition with their husbands and father, they ultimately agreed, deciding to take on the responsibility and risk to help complete 1953's women-led supply chain. "They had grown up on this farm, and they knew it like the back of their hand, but they never saw themselves as CEOs. They never saw themselves as the people in charge of running the farm," Shah explained. "What made them think differently was the high school down the street and all the girls who were in that high school, just like they used to be, and wanting to let those girls know that there was nothing they couldn't do. ... It was a motivation we all shared, and we knew we had an alignment of our values, which told us we were in the right place. And that really completed our supply chain." Every Thursday, Elizabeth Gore discusses real-life stories and smart strategies for launching a small business on The Big Idea podcast. You can find more episodes on our video hub or watch on your preferred streaming service. Sign up for the Mind Your Money newsletter Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rail customers urge regulators to block Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal, FT reports
(Reuters) -U.S. railroad customer groups have demanded regulators block or put onerous conditions on the proposed merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern, the Financial Times reported on Sunday. Seven associations of shippers have expressed concern the planned deal would significantly increase the power of the merged railroad to raise prices or reduce service standards, the report said. Last month, Union Pacific said it would buy smaller rival Norfolk Southern in an $85 billion deal to create the first U.S. coast-to-coast freight rail operator and reshape the movement of goods from grains to autos across the country. The two railroads are expected to have a combined enterprise value of $250 billion and would unlock about $2.75 billion in annualized synergies, the companies said. Reuters could not immediately verify the FT report. Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. Previously, the transportation division of SMART, the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, said it plans to oppose the merger when it comes before the Surface Transportation Board for review. Major railroad unions have long opposed consolidation, arguing such mergers threaten jobs and risk disrupting rail service. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer also criticized the merger saying the deal would push "us even further down the road of dangerous consolidation and monopoly power ... This is a hostile takeover of America's infrastructure."
