We find that, when a firm is sued by non-practicing entities (NPEs), the likelihood of its technology peers being sued increases in the subsequent year. Defendants’ technology peers experience significant market value losses around the lawsuit filing date. Moreover, defendants’ technology peers respond to NPE litigation risk by increasing R&D investments to develop workaround technologies. However, the increase in R&D incrementally generates fewer patent citations or patents with lower values. Thus, our results highlight broader wealth effects and corresponding real effects of NPE-initiated litigation on defendants’ technology peers. These results provide sharp contrasts to the insignificant wealth and real impacts on defendants’ technology peers if litigations are initiated by practicing entities (PEs). The new evidence informs the current regulatory and policy debates pertaining to NPEs.
{"title":"Chilling Effects of Patent Trolls","authors":"Feng Chen, Y. Hou, Jiaping Qiu, G. Richardson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3492471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3492471","url":null,"abstract":"We find that, when a firm is sued by non-practicing entities (NPEs), the likelihood of its technology peers being sued increases in the subsequent year. Defendants’ technology peers experience significant market value losses around the lawsuit filing date. Moreover, defendants’ technology peers respond to NPE litigation risk by increasing R&D investments to develop workaround technologies. However, the increase in R&D incrementally generates fewer patent citations or patents with lower values. Thus, our results highlight broader wealth effects and corresponding real effects of NPE-initiated litigation on defendants’ technology peers. These results provide sharp contrasts to the insignificant wealth and real impacts on defendants’ technology peers if litigations are initiated by practicing entities (PEs). The new evidence informs the current regulatory and policy debates pertaining to NPEs.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127587502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Hazem R. Bonna, Ahmed S. El-Hakim, Hatem S. El-Behairy
Worldwide, all the current sustainable rating and certification systems are targeting fair and applicable rating criteria and conditions to best matching the circumstances and sustainable needs of every nation for their environmental conditions, equity needs, and economic concerns. This paper is made to evaluate and measure the compliance of LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) sustainable rating and certification system [1] with the sustainability concerns of the new construction (NC) market outside the USA through considering Egypt as an example and conducting a detailed comparative analysis between the LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) sustainable rating and certification system [1] and the authors' proposed sustainable rating and certification system for new construction in Egypt (Bonna (2018) [2]), to highlight most of the missing sustainability rating credits/issues which are necessary for Egypt and not found within the LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) rating system [1]. Zuo and Zhao [3] emphasized that the green buildings in different countries are designed and built according to local climatic conditions and to suit the requirements of the locals and therefore, the assessment criteria for these green buildings are different.
{"title":"Technical Evaluation of LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) for Rating and Certification of Sustainable New Construction Outside the USA","authors":"Hazem R. Bonna, Ahmed S. El-Hakim, Hatem S. El-Behairy","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3340802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3340802","url":null,"abstract":"Worldwide, all the current sustainable rating and certification systems are targeting fair and applicable rating criteria and conditions to best matching the circumstances and sustainable needs of every nation for their environmental conditions, equity needs, and economic concerns. \u0000 \u0000This paper is made to evaluate and measure the compliance of LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) sustainable rating and certification system [1] with the sustainability concerns of the new construction (NC) market outside the USA through considering Egypt as an example and conducting a detailed comparative analysis between the LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) sustainable rating and certification system [1] and the authors' proposed sustainable rating and certification system for new construction in Egypt (Bonna (2018) [2]), to highlight most of the missing sustainability rating credits/issues which are necessary for Egypt and not found within the LEED-v4.1-(BD+C: NC) rating system [1]. \u0000 \u0000Zuo and Zhao [3] emphasized that the green buildings in different countries are designed and built according to local climatic conditions and to suit the requirements of the locals and therefore, the assessment criteria for these green buildings are different.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128197873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Considering China’s policy-driven patent expansion, we validate domestic citations in comparison to foreign ones, which are exogenous to China’s policy, as economic indicators. We derive internationally comparable citation data from international search reports. Whereas foreign citations show that Chinese PCT applications reach only a third of the non-Chinese quality benchmark, the extension towards domestic and self citations suggests an increasing quality level that is closer to the benchmark. We investigate these differences based on firm-level regressions and find that only foreign citations, but not domestic and self citations, have a significant and positive relation to R&D stocks. As Chinese citations appear to suffer from an upward bias, we confirm that indicators fail as reliable measures if they become the target of policy. Taking Germany as a counterexample, we show that domestic and self citations may be used as quality measures if policy distortion is not a concern.
{"title":"Measuring Patent Quality Based on ISR Citations: Development of Indices and Application to Chinese Firm-Level Data","authors":"P. Boeing, Elisabeth F. Mueller","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3136171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3136171","url":null,"abstract":"Considering China’s policy-driven patent expansion, we validate domestic citations in comparison to foreign ones, which are exogenous to China’s policy, as economic indicators. We derive internationally comparable citation data from international search reports. Whereas foreign citations show that Chinese PCT applications reach only a third of the non-Chinese quality benchmark, the extension towards domestic and self citations suggests an increasing quality level that is closer to the benchmark. We investigate these differences based on firm-level regressions and find that only foreign citations, but not domestic and self citations, have a significant and positive relation to R&D stocks. As Chinese citations appear to suffer from an upward bias, we confirm that indicators fail as reliable measures if they become the target of policy. Taking Germany as a counterexample, we show that domestic and self citations may be used as quality measures if policy distortion is not a concern.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131121862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Patent documents are an ample source of technical and commercial knowledge and analysis of patent is considered as a useful tool for R&D management and techno economic analysis in different sectors across the globe. Patent statistics provide a fertile ground for analyzing the strength and weaknesses of individual actors in selected technology fields. This paper tried to analyze patents pertaining to Indian electrical energy sector.
{"title":"A Brief Analysis of the Patents Associated With the Indian Electrical Energy Sector","authors":"Kallal Banerjee, D. Dey","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2945336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2945336","url":null,"abstract":"Patent documents are an ample source of technical and commercial knowledge and analysis of patent is considered as a useful tool for R&D management and techno economic analysis in different sectors across the globe. Patent statistics provide a fertile ground for analyzing the strength and weaknesses of individual actors in selected technology fields. This paper tried to analyze patents pertaining to Indian electrical energy sector.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131187536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Different elements in the patent community speak of inventions and the criteria through which property rights may be granted or withheld from them in ways that are often incongruent. In large part this is due to disagreements about the functional, if not normative legitimacy, of many patentability standards. This paper examines how the European Patent Office’s (EPO) practice Examination Guidelines designed to be a prosaic guide to legal standards, transforms contested inventive matter and methods into patent claims. In doing so these Guidelines manage and manipulate the legitimate expectations of the patent community. The analysis makes the broader conceptual point that patent law standards are shaped by a version of ‘textualisation’ that relies on linguistic and rhetorical structures to cumulatively entrench meanings, and manage the acceptance of the EPO’s legal positions by those who are governed by them. The scale of textualised outcomes in patent law is a threat to coherence but also explains the EPO’s ascendancy in the regulatory sphere.
{"title":"The Construction of Legitimacy in European Patent Law","authors":"S. Thambisetty","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2851958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2851958","url":null,"abstract":"Different elements in the patent community speak of inventions and the criteria through which property rights may be granted or withheld from them in ways that are often incongruent. In large part this is due to disagreements about the functional, if not normative legitimacy, of many patentability standards. This paper examines how the European Patent Office’s (EPO) practice Examination Guidelines designed to be a prosaic guide to legal standards, transforms contested inventive matter and methods into patent claims. In doing so these Guidelines manage and manipulate the legitimate expectations of the patent community. The analysis makes the broader conceptual point that patent law standards are shaped by a version of ‘textualisation’ that relies on linguistic and rhetorical structures to cumulatively entrench meanings, and manage the acceptance of the EPO’s legal positions by those who are governed by them. The scale of textualised outcomes in patent law is a threat to coherence but also explains the EPO’s ascendancy in the regulatory sphere.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115112648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-02-01DOI: 10.4337/9781784719463.00023
Michael W. Carroll
This chapter focuses on the ways in which intellectual property law can act as a barrier to data sharing. Intellectual property laws supply exclusive rights that can enable a researcher, employer or funder to ‘own’ data; they can then bring legal claims against persons who access or reuse data without permission. Some of these rights attach automatically to data, data sets, or databases, and thus must be managed properly to enable robust data sharing in climate science. Other rights are created by contract, and the policies around such privately created rights must be understood and analyzed. This chapter briefly describes the variety of climate data needed by researchers and the role of intellectual property and related rights in governing access to and use of such data.
{"title":"Intellectual Property and Related Rights in Climate Data","authors":"Michael W. Carroll","doi":"10.4337/9781784719463.00023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784719463.00023","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on the ways in which intellectual property law can act as a barrier to data sharing. Intellectual property laws supply exclusive rights that can enable a researcher, employer or funder to ‘own’ data; they can then bring legal claims against persons who access or reuse data without permission. Some of these rights attach automatically to data, data sets, or databases, and thus must be managed properly to enable robust data sharing in climate science. Other rights are created by contract, and the policies around such privately created rights must be understood and analyzed. This chapter briefly describes the variety of climate data needed by researchers and the role of intellectual property and related rights in governing access to and use of such data.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125907666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Czarnitzki, Thorsten Doherr, K. Hussinger, Paula Schliessler, Andrew A. Toole
We examine how the ownership of intellectual property rights influences patenting of university-discovered inventions. In 2002, Germany transferred patent rights from faculty members to their universities. To identify the effect on the volume of patenting, we exploit the researcher-level exogeneity of the 2002 policy change using a novel researcher-level panel database that includes a control group not affected by the law change. For professors who had existing industry connections, the policy decreased patenting, but for those without prior industry connections, it increased patenting. Overall, fewer university inventions were patented following the shift from inventor to institutional ownership.
{"title":"Individual versus Institutional Ownership of University-Discovered Inventions","authors":"D. Czarnitzki, Thorsten Doherr, K. Hussinger, Paula Schliessler, Andrew A. Toole","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2570738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2570738","url":null,"abstract":"We examine how the ownership of intellectual property rights influences patenting of university-discovered inventions. In 2002, Germany transferred patent rights from faculty members to their universities. To identify the effect on the volume of patenting, we exploit the researcher-level exogeneity of the 2002 policy change using a novel researcher-level panel database that includes a control group not affected by the law change. For professors who had existing industry connections, the policy decreased patenting, but for those without prior industry connections, it increased patenting. Overall, fewer university inventions were patented following the shift from inventor to institutional ownership.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130348004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Academic inventions are key drivers of technical progress in modern economies, and exclusive licensing has become the dominant means of transfer to the private sector. However, the strong licensee incentives generated by exclusive academic licensing are generally assumed to come at the expense of discouragement or diversion of research by nonlicensees. Using data from university campuses and national research laboratories we find that, after exclusive licensing, forward citations by private sector nonlicensees actually increase. An unanticipated exclusive license appears to be a signpost pointing to commercially relevant innovation pathways that nonlicensees follow with successful patented research. Tests using multiple pre-license information disclosures support this signaling hypothesis.
{"title":"Academic Patent Licenses: Roadblocks or Signposts for Nonlicensee Cumulative Innovation?","authors":"Kyriakos Drivas, Zhen Lei, Brian D. Wright","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2489231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2489231","url":null,"abstract":"Academic inventions are key drivers of technical progress in modern economies, and exclusive licensing has become the dominant means of transfer to the private sector. However, the strong licensee incentives generated by exclusive academic licensing are generally assumed to come at the expense of discouragement or diversion of research by nonlicensees. Using data from university campuses and national research laboratories we find that, after exclusive licensing, forward citations by private sector nonlicensees actually increase. An unanticipated exclusive license appears to be a signpost pointing to commercially relevant innovation pathways that nonlicensees follow with successful patented research. Tests using multiple pre-license information disclosures support this signaling hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131296308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reviews the impact of intellectual property (IP) protection on foreign direct investment (FDI) by multinational enterprises (MNEs) in developing countries. Applying different panel data techniques to a newly-created comprehensive FDI/IP dataset of 31 Swiss MNEs investing into 53 developing WTO Members over a period of 21 years (1990-2010), this study seeks to examine whether the local IP protection level has a significant positive effect on MNEs’ decisions to invest in developing host countries and whether this effect differs between particular industry sectors, technological intensity levels and stages of host country development. The author could not find conclusive evidence that IP protection has an overall significant positive effect on FDI volumes. A differentiated analysis of specific sectors, however, does identify a significant positive effect for the chemical industry and for high-tech/medium-high-tech companies. Furthermore, no conclusive evidence was found that the effect of IP protection on investment decisions by MNEs differs according to the development level of the host country.
{"title":"The Impact of Intellectual Property Protection on MNEs’ Decisions to Invest in Developing Countries: Empirical Evidence from New Swiss Firm-Level FDI Panel Data","authors":"A. Hold","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2411727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2411727","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the impact of intellectual property (IP) protection on foreign direct investment (FDI) by multinational enterprises (MNEs) in developing countries. Applying different panel data techniques to a newly-created comprehensive FDI/IP dataset of 31 Swiss MNEs investing into 53 developing WTO Members over a period of 21 years (1990-2010), this study seeks to examine whether the local IP protection level has a significant positive effect on MNEs’ decisions to invest in developing host countries and whether this effect differs between particular industry sectors, technological intensity levels and stages of host country development. The author could not find conclusive evidence that IP protection has an overall significant positive effect on FDI volumes. A differentiated analysis of specific sectors, however, does identify a significant positive effect for the chemical industry and for high-tech/medium-high-tech companies. Furthermore, no conclusive evidence was found that the effect of IP protection on investment decisions by MNEs differs according to the development level of the host country.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116347109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Several aspects of patent litigation call into question patent holders’ motivation for enforcing their exclusionary rights. Indeed, the expense alone can be enough to deter a firm from engaging in litigation, especially if it is likely that the parties will be unable to reach a settlement agreement and will go to trial. Notwithstanding, the number of patent infringement filings in district courts grows each year, thus providing a forum for asking what patent holders really desire to gain from litigating. Although injunctive relief and damages awards confer benefits to patent holders that can make litigating worthwhile, this Article posits that plaintiffs have no intention of ever obtaining these statutory remedies. Rather, handsome settlement arrangements provide the incentive for patentees to litigate. This Article contends that such settlement agreements are becoming a way of life for patent holders, and that rather than viewing litigation as an end result of parties’ failure to resolve a dispute, it is instead becoming the ordinary course of business and a routine consequence of owning a patent.
{"title":"Why Patentees Litigate","authors":"Damon C. Andrews","doi":"10.7916/D87W6NP8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D87W6NP8","url":null,"abstract":"Several aspects of patent litigation call into question patent holders’ motivation for enforcing their exclusionary rights. Indeed, the expense alone can be enough to deter a firm from engaging in litigation, especially if it is likely that the parties will be unable to reach a settlement agreement and will go to trial. Notwithstanding, the number of patent infringement filings in district courts grows each year, thus providing a forum for asking what patent holders really desire to gain from litigating. Although injunctive relief and damages awards confer benefits to patent holders that can make litigating worthwhile, this Article posits that plaintiffs have no intention of ever obtaining these statutory remedies. Rather, handsome settlement arrangements provide the incentive for patentees to litigate. This Article contends that such settlement agreements are becoming a way of life for patent holders, and that rather than viewing litigation as an end result of parties’ failure to resolve a dispute, it is instead becoming the ordinary course of business and a routine consequence of owning a patent.","PeriodicalId":255007,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Patents (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130582968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：