Patent Eligibility and Investment

David O. Taylor
{"title":"Patent Eligibility and Investment","authors":"David O. Taylor","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3340937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Have the Supreme Court’s recent patent eligibility cases changed the behavior of venture capital and private equity investment firms, and if so how? This Article provides empirical data about investors’ answers to those important questions. Analyzing responses to a survey of 475 investors at firms investing in various industries and at various stages of funding, this Article explores how the Court’s recent cases have influenced these firms’ decisions to invest in companies developing technology. The survey results reveal investors’ overwhelming belief that patent eligibility is an important consideration in investment decisionmaking, and that reduced patent eligibility makes it less likely their firms will invest in companies developing technology. According to investors, however, the impact differs between industries. For example, investors predominantly indicated no impact or only slightly decreased investments in the software and Internet industry, but somewhat or strongly decreased investments in the biotechnology, medical device, and pharmaceutical industries. The data and these findings (as well as others described in the Article) provide critical insight, enabling evidence-based evaluation of competing arguments in the ongoing debate about the need for congressional intervention in the law of patent eligibility. And, in particular, they indicate reform is most crucial to ensure continued robust investment in the development of life science technologies.","PeriodicalId":10698,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","volume":"289 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Law & Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3340937","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

Have the Supreme Court’s recent patent eligibility cases changed the behavior of venture capital and private equity investment firms, and if so how? This Article provides empirical data about investors’ answers to those important questions. Analyzing responses to a survey of 475 investors at firms investing in various industries and at various stages of funding, this Article explores how the Court’s recent cases have influenced these firms’ decisions to invest in companies developing technology. The survey results reveal investors’ overwhelming belief that patent eligibility is an important consideration in investment decisionmaking, and that reduced patent eligibility makes it less likely their firms will invest in companies developing technology. According to investors, however, the impact differs between industries. For example, investors predominantly indicated no impact or only slightly decreased investments in the software and Internet industry, but somewhat or strongly decreased investments in the biotechnology, medical device, and pharmaceutical industries. The data and these findings (as well as others described in the Article) provide critical insight, enabling evidence-based evaluation of competing arguments in the ongoing debate about the need for congressional intervention in the law of patent eligibility. And, in particular, they indicate reform is most crucial to ensure continued robust investment in the development of life science technologies.
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
专利资格与投资
最高法院最近的专利资格案件是否改变了风险资本和私募股权投资公司的行为,如果有的话,是如何改变的?本文提供了投资者对这些重要问题的答案的实证数据。本文分析了对投资于不同行业和不同融资阶段的公司的475名投资者的调查结果,探讨了法院最近的案件如何影响这些公司投资开发技术公司的决定。调查结果显示,投资者压倒性地认为专利资格是投资决策中的一个重要考虑因素,专利资格的降低使他们的公司不太可能投资于开发技术的公司。然而,投资者表示,不同行业的影响有所不同。例如,投资者主要表示在软件和互联网行业的投资没有受到影响或只是略有减少,但在生物技术、医疗设备和制药行业的投资有所减少或大幅减少。数据和这些发现(以及文章中描述的其他发现)提供了关键的见解,使在正在进行的关于国会是否需要干预专利资格法律的辩论中,能够对相互竞争的论点进行基于证据的评估。他们特别指出,改革对于确保对生命科学技术发展的持续强劲投资至关重要。
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
The Real Consequences of Macroprudential FX Regulations Will the EU Taxonomy Regulation Foster a Sustainable Corporate Governance? Hedge Fund Management and Pricing Structure around the World Open Access, Interoperability, and the DTCC's Unexpected Path to Monopoly Indirect Investor Protection: The Investment Ecosystem and Its Legal Underpinnings
×
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