Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MuchToLearn

  • Rank
  1. I feel this thread is going in a few different directions here! I am not certain P.L. 96-517, the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 is a dispositive answer here given the scope of work, but I am far from even beginning to understand the Act and its interplay between restrictions on publication vs. rights in IP. This would certainly be the simplest answer, though. I've got a tentative discussion established with our Legal department to help explore the issue. Joel, practically speaking, the Government will almost certainly not have any objection - the CO has (verbally!) assured me that there isn't a scen
  2. As a summary, the research is not delving into anything new - the requirement is to research the existing "State-of-the-Practice" using marketing and technology sources, and other publicly available resources. This includes gathering information through peer exchanges. The information will be distilled into two informational briefs / primer documents. MtL
  3. I've provided the text of the clauses below. DISSEMINATION OF CONTRACT INFORMATION (OCT 1994) The Contractor shall not publish, permit to be published, or distribute for public consumption, any information, oral or written, concerning the results or conclusions made pursuant to the performance of this contract, without the prior written consent of the Contracting Officer. Two copies of any material proposed to be published or distributed shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer. (Clause appears in IDIQ) PROPRIETARY RIGHTS IN REPORTS All property rights, including publication rights, in p
  4. Thanks everyone! I agree with Retreadfed that I am operating from that false premise. I know this basic principle, but for some reason didn't see it as dispositive here. The specific publication clause does not state it needs to be flowed down. Is the answer really that simple, though? The Government prohibits the Prime from publishing information without the CO's prior written consent. But because it is not required to be flowed down, subs are free to disregard? **EDIT: (provided the Prime either neglected to flow it down or elected not to do so?) I also agree with H2H concerning the gene
  5. Knowledgeable Ones, I humbly beseech thee: Would greatly appreciate confirmation that my thought process is complete on this issue of flow down clauses and Educational Institutions, and I have not left any possible avenue of resolution unexplored. Thank you! Scenario: I work for a large Corporation. Our Subcontractor is an Educational Institution (EI). They have taken numerous exceptions to the Prime Contract terms and conditions, specifically around the rights to publication (permitting the EI to publish its research performed under the subcontract, whereas the terms currently require pri
  6. Thank you everyone, this has been very enlightening and helpful. Two quick points - In my market, we have discussed the issue to the point where we would attempt / desire to propose profit on travel costs only when travel is a substantial cost component of the work. Everything said above rings true, but even then as a business we are willing to forego profit on travel except where it can have a significant impact on the bottom line. I don't know Vern, your name carries a good bit of weight in my neck of the woods...
  7. H2H - Fair point, I should clarify. The question has arisen in the context of FFP task order solicitations that provide for "cost reimbursable" travel CLINs (so perhaps it is accurate to call them hybrid?). So, we are not required to propose travel costs as part of the proposed fixed price. Occasionally we will be given a plug number to propose for the travel figure, but in 85% cases we have the discretion to propose an estimated travel budget we believe will be necessary to complete the tasks. For CPFF, to be honest I'm not sure. My instinct is to agree with you outright, since otherwise s
  8. Hello All! I have read enough of the posts on this forum to know I dare not ask whether one can apply G&A or profit when invoicing for travel on a cost reimbursable CLIN. A crude summary would be that "in absence of a prohibition within the terms of the contract, G&A (or profit) may be proposed to be added to cost reimbursable CLINs consistent with the contractor's disclosed accounting practices. In such a case, the amounts are a matter of negotiation between the parties." I work for a Government contractor, and I manage a contract that, at the IDIQ level, states as follows with rega
  9. wvanpup - Can I say it is "based on a true story?" I also consider it an academic question because my organization has already decided it refers to, or at least covers , a subcontracting arrangement and we are proceeding accordingly. I asked the question to the law department and my direct supervisor (both with vastly more experience than I have), and while I didn't get an opportunity to fully explain my position, it appeared for both of them that it wasn't even a question as to whether it covered a subcontract scenario. This was an inherited agreement for me, so I cannot speak to what occu
  10. Thanks everyone. Really appreciate your insights. If this goes anywhere on my end, I'll report back. -MuchToLearn
  11. ji20874, When I stated "I understand the intent was likely to precisely address a subcontract scenario", I came to that conclusion via your #2 - in other words, what else could it possibly be referring to? The question still remains why it is a plausible (even a likely) reason this refers to a subcontract arrangement, because it is still unclear why that would make sense given the concept of a contract. My original question was born out of sheer curiosity, and I appreciate both Vern and ji20874's thoughts. Something came to me this morning...could the indirect contract language possibly re
  12. All, I have a Contract law hypothetical: A subcontract indicates the subcontractor covenants and agrees that "for a period of 6 months after the term of the subcontract, the subcontractor will not, either directly or indirectly, enter into a contract with End Client X for services Y and Z". The question: Could a company bound by this clause enter into a subcontract with a Prime that is performing services Y and Z for Agency X? In a Prime-Sub relationship, the sub has no privity of contract with the end-customer...the subcontract relationship is entirely between the Prime and the Sub. There
  13. 1. No. 2. (a) (monthly invoice for actual labor costs + burdens and fee) -MuchToLearn
  • Create New...