IP Protection Matters

Coke Morgan Stewart, President and CEO of the Council for Innovation Promotion (C4IP), and a Former Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), discusses the Constitutional foundations of intellectual property protection and the resulting democratization of innovation, patent eligibility, false narratives about the U.S. patent system, and the need to stabilize and strengthen our IP system to outcompete China.

Dr. Colleen Scott, a 2026 winner of the Bayh-Dole Coalition’s American Innovator Award, chemist and Associate Professor at Mississippi State University, who discovered a new class of shortwave infrared (SWIR) imaging dyes that have potential to allow surgeons to visualize tumors with greater depth and clarity in real time, discusses the economic significance of the Bayh-Dole Act and importance of strong IP protections in bringing new innovations to market.

Patrick Kilbride, Policy Fellow at the Center for American Principles, discusses the United States Trade Representative’s 2026 Special 301 Report on the adequacy and effectiveness of the intellectual property protection practices of U.S. trading partners, changes and surprised compared to reports of previous years, and the practical impacts on global IP protection of the report going forward.

Stephen Susalka, Chief Executive Officer of AUTM, discusses how university technology transfer powers the innovation economy – creating jobs, saving and enhancing lives, and improving productivity – the Bayh-Dole Act, which has enabled tremendous progress in innovation, and the importance of strong and predictable intellectual property protections.

Kristen Jakobsen Osenga, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the University of Richmond School of Law, discusses patent eligibility and preliminary injunctions in patent litigation, how strong intellectual property protections drive innovation, and some of the terminology (i.e., “evergreening” and “patent thickets”) often used by advocates for weaker intellectual property protections.