Incentivizing the Ordinary User

G. Bernstein
{"title":"Incentivizing the Ordinary User","authors":"G. Bernstein","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2163142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Disputes regarding the effectiveness of the patent system focus on the appropriate scope of patent rights. This Article departs from the traditional debate by looking instead at the players regulated by the patent system. The Article shows that the patent system fails to effectively encourage technological dissemination because it focuses on the patent owner and his competitors, while largely ignoring a crucial player: the ordinary user. The user in his everyday decisions of whether to adopt or not to adopt a technology plays a critical role in determining whether a new technology will be disseminated. Yet, patent law contains an overly simplistic view of the ordinary user. It views the ordinary user as motivated by price and availability alone. This Article uncovers the intricacy of ordinary users’ decisions regarding technological adoption. It identifies two main sources of user resistance: resistance due to novelty and resistance due to perceived consequences. Many believe that the market rule should govern the adoption process of new technologies, that is, the market should decide which technology is adopted. Yet, this rule fails to recognize the multi-faceted nature of the ordinary user. This Article proposes that while government action to encourage user adoption should not be the norm, government action gently nudging the user could be particularly effective in cases of market failures. It concludes by suggesting two instances, in which government action is particularly warranted. First, when market failure occurs because a technology is dependent on network effects and the accumulation of a critical mass of users. Second, when time is of the essence and there is a critical need to disseminate a technology quickly.","PeriodicalId":246118,"journal":{"name":"Seton Hall Law School","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seton Hall Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2163142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Disputes regarding the effectiveness of the patent system focus on the appropriate scope of patent rights. This Article departs from the traditional debate by looking instead at the players regulated by the patent system. The Article shows that the patent system fails to effectively encourage technological dissemination because it focuses on the patent owner and his competitors, while largely ignoring a crucial player: the ordinary user. The user in his everyday decisions of whether to adopt or not to adopt a technology plays a critical role in determining whether a new technology will be disseminated. Yet, patent law contains an overly simplistic view of the ordinary user. It views the ordinary user as motivated by price and availability alone. This Article uncovers the intricacy of ordinary users’ decisions regarding technological adoption. It identifies two main sources of user resistance: resistance due to novelty and resistance due to perceived consequences. Many believe that the market rule should govern the adoption process of new technologies, that is, the market should decide which technology is adopted. Yet, this rule fails to recognize the multi-faceted nature of the ordinary user. This Article proposes that while government action to encourage user adoption should not be the norm, government action gently nudging the user could be particularly effective in cases of market failures. It concludes by suggesting two instances, in which government action is particularly warranted. First, when market failure occurs because a technology is dependent on network effects and the accumulation of a critical mass of users. Second, when time is of the essence and there is a critical need to disseminate a technology quickly.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
激励普通用户
关于专利制度有效性的争议主要集中在专利权的适当范围问题上。本文从传统的争论出发,转而关注受专利制度监管的参与者。这篇文章表明,专利制度未能有效地鼓励技术传播,因为它关注专利所有者及其竞争对手,而在很大程度上忽视了一个关键的参与者:普通用户。用户在日常决定是否采用一项技术时,在决定一项新技术是否会传播方面起着关键作用。然而,专利法对普通用户的看法过于简单化。它认为普通用户只受价格和可用性的驱使。本文揭示了普通用户关于采用技术的决策的复杂性。它确定了用户抗拒的两个主要来源:新颖性的抗拒和感知后果的抗拒。许多人认为市场规则应该支配新技术的采用过程,也就是说,市场应该决定采用哪种技术。然而,这一规则未能认识到普通用户的多面性。本文提出,虽然政府鼓励用户采用的行动不应成为常态,但在市场失灵的情况下,政府轻轻地推动用户的行动可能特别有效。最后,它提出了两个例子,在这些例子中,政府的行动是特别必要的。首先,由于一项技术依赖于网络效应和临界用户数量的积累而发生市场失灵。第二,当时间紧迫,迫切需要迅速传播一项技术时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Lehman's Derivative Portfolio Social Network Analysis of Trade Secrets and Patents as Social Relations Incentivizing the Ordinary User Addressing Gaps in the Dodd-Frank Act: Directors' Risk Management Oversight Obligations Does an Independent Board Improve Nonprofit Corporate Governance?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1