Finally, it may be argued that not permitting governmentally 
funded researchers access to patents allows industrial researchers 
to employ the "free" information generated at public expense, to create 
patentable products. This would negate the benefits derived from 
refusing patents to scientists for their discoveries made through the 
governmentally funded research. The patent policy must account for this 
eventuality. The simplest remedy for this would give the public the 
full patent rights arising from innovations derived from the research 
performed under its auspices. Then, should private interests require 
this knowledge, they could purchase the rights from the public providing 
compensation to the public for its expense and for its incursion of risk. 
Public retention of patent rights would also privide the most leverage 
for enforcement of rules designed to minimize any further risk arising 
from the private research efforts. 
Based on these considerations I would urge you to adopt either 
Options 2 or 3 as outlined on page three of your letter of 7 September, 
1976. However, I believe Option 3 is most consistent with the public 
Interest as discussed above; it would retain the benefits from publicly 
funded research for the public, and would provide the Department the 
most leverage in enforcing the Guidelines or any other regulation it 
deems necessary. 
Thank you for permitting me th e opportunity to comment on this 
very important issues. 
Sincerely 
Robert Carow 
[ 101 ] 
