Executive Order 12591: Facilitating access to science and technology
Summary
EO 12591 seeks to make federally supported science and technology more useful outside government. Reagan directed agencies and laboratories to promote cooperation, licensing and transfer of research results within statutory limits. Its continuing effect does not mean every federally funded invention belongs to the public without restrictions or that every company can demand an exclusive license.
Status: In effect. Yes. As amended by EO 12618, it remains part of the federal technology-transfer and patent-rights framework, including current 37 CFR part 401 references.
Key facts at a glance
| Signed | April 10, 1987 |
|---|---|
| President | Ronald Reagan |
| Federal Register | 52 FR 13414; published April 22, 1987 |
| Current label | In effect |
| Amended by | EO 12618 |
| Related orders | EO 12618 |
| Checked | October 25, 2026 |
What it requires today
Agencies facilitate cooperative research and development arrangements and make laboratory expertise and inventions available under authorized mechanisms. A cooperative agreement needs its own legal authority and terms. The order promotes such collaboration rather than replacing the underlying statutes governing laboratories.
Patent-rights policy encourages contractor ownership in covered situations while preserving government rights and other statutory conditions. Contractor title and a government license can coexist. Describing the policy as an unconditional transfer of all government intellectual property would omit essential limitations.
Royalty sharing, licensing practices and technical information policies are addressed alongside organizational implementation. The relevant modern rule, agreement and agency patent decision determine a particular invention’s treatment. A laboratory’s technology-transfer mission is not a guarantee that negotiations will result in a license.
Who it affects
Federal research agencies, government laboratories, contractors, researchers and prospective licensees are affected. The order’s policy spans several mechanisms, so a small-business research award, a laboratory partnership and an invention license should not be assumed to have identical ownership rules.
How it came about
The 1987 order built on federal technology-transfer legislation and attempts to move research into practical application. EO 12618 amended it later that year. The framework connects agency management with statutory invention policy rather than creating a free-standing private entitlement to federal inventions.
What agencies did under it
Current 37 CFR 401.14 includes a contractor definition expressly referring to EO 12591 as amended. Current NASA acquisition and grant materials also reference the technology-transfer framework. These concrete implementation records support the status label.
NIST describes the Interagency Working Group for Technology Transfer in relation to the order. Such coordination can improve consistent practice, but a description of a working group should not be mistaken for evidence that every laboratory has met every transfer target or that a given agreement is legally sufficient.
Implementation records: Current patent rights clause; NASA January 2026 award terms; NIST technology-transfer coordination.
Amendments and family tree
EO 12618 amended EO 12591 in December 1987. Later statutes, patent regulations and agency terms also affect implementation. The guide distinguishes the order’s continuing policy role from historical dollar limits or organizational details that should not be assumed unchanged without examining current law.
Court cases
No court ruling specifically on EO 12591 was found in the official presidential, disposition and agency sources examined as of October 25, 2026. The status assessment for this instrument is: Yes. As amended by EO 12618, it remains part of the federal technology-transfer and patent-rights framework, including current 37 CFR part 401 references.
Common questions
Does the public own every invention?
No. Patent ownership, government licenses and disclosure duties depend on the relevant statute, regulation and agreement. The order promotes transfer without eliminating those distinctions.
Is a CRADA the same as a procurement contract?
No. Cooperative research and development agreements have their own statutory authority and terms. The appropriate mechanism depends on the laboratory and proposed collaboration.
Can a company demand an exclusive license?
The order does not guarantee a particular applicant a license. Agency licensing authority, required procedures and the negotiated terms still matter.
Why mention the 1987 amendment?
EO 12618 changed the framework. A current reference is to EO 12591 as amended, so the original April text alone is not a complete account.
Legal basis
The statutory framework includes federal patent-rights and technology-transfer laws, including the Bayh–Dole and Stevenson–Wydler settings as applicable. The order directs executive implementation within law; it cannot eliminate statutory government rights or a restriction attached to a particular invention.
Further reading
Sources
Cite this page
EO Explained, “Executive Order 12591: Facilitating access to science and technology”, checked October 25, 2026. https://eoexplained.com/historic-orders/historic-12591-facilitating-access-to-science-and-technology. Include an access date when citing this dated account. For the presidential instrument itself, cite 52 FR 13414 and the official text.
Last checked
. EO 12591 was checked against its signed record, current disposition and cited implementation sources for the status and scope described above. Report an error or a later official source.