专利法改革与创新:对过去 20 年的实证评估

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS International Review of Law and Economics Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.1016/j.irle.2024.106210
Christian Helmers , Brian J. Love
{"title":"专利法改革与创新:对过去 20 年的实证评估","authors":"Christian Helmers ,&nbsp;Brian J. Love","doi":"10.1016/j.irle.2024.106210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We ask whether four of the most important U.S. patent system reforms of the last 20 years—elimination of presumptive injunctive relief for victorious patent enforcers in <em>eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC</em>, 547 U.S. 388 (2006); creation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in the America Invents Act; restriction of software’s eligibility for patent protection in <em>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</em>, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); and limitation of patent enforcers’ choice of forum in <em>TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp. Brands, LLC</em>, 137 S. Ct. 1514 (2017)—had a measurable impact on innovation in the U.S. Specifically, we use a sample of publicly traded firms to construct firm-level measures of innovation and exposure to each reform and adopt a variety of difference-in-differences approaches that assesses how innovation-related activities changed post-reform at relatively exposed versus relatively unexposed firms. We find: a positive association between <em>eBay</em> and R&amp;D spending by firms that were relatively more exposed to patent litigation prior to the Court’s decision; a positive association between the introduction of PTAB proceedings and R&amp;D expenditures by firms that innovate in tech classes where PTAB has been most active; a positive association between <em>Alice</em> and R&amp;D spending by software firms; and a positive association between <em>TC Heartland</em> and R&amp;D spending by firms that thereafter could not be sued in the Eastern District of Texas, a court long associated with opportunistic forum shopping.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47202,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law and Economics","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 106210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patent law reform and innovation: An empirical assessment of the last 20 years\",\"authors\":\"Christian Helmers ,&nbsp;Brian J. Love\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.irle.2024.106210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We ask whether four of the most important U.S. patent system reforms of the last 20 years—elimination of presumptive injunctive relief for victorious patent enforcers in <em>eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC</em>, 547 U.S. 388 (2006); creation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in the America Invents Act; restriction of software’s eligibility for patent protection in <em>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</em>, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); and limitation of patent enforcers’ choice of forum in <em>TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp. Brands, LLC</em>, 137 S. Ct. 1514 (2017)—had a measurable impact on innovation in the U.S. Specifically, we use a sample of publicly traded firms to construct firm-level measures of innovation and exposure to each reform and adopt a variety of difference-in-differences approaches that assesses how innovation-related activities changed post-reform at relatively exposed versus relatively unexposed firms. We find: a positive association between <em>eBay</em> and R&amp;D spending by firms that were relatively more exposed to patent litigation prior to the Court’s decision; a positive association between the introduction of PTAB proceedings and R&amp;D expenditures by firms that innovate in tech classes where PTAB has been most active; a positive association between <em>Alice</em> and R&amp;D spending by software firms; and a positive association between <em>TC Heartland</em> and R&amp;D spending by firms that thereafter could not be sued in the Eastern District of Texas, a court long associated with opportunistic forum shopping.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"volume\":\"79 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106210\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000309\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000309","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们要问的是,过去 20 年中最重要的四项美国专利制度改革--在 eBay Inc.388 (2006);在《美国发明法案》中设立专利审判和上诉委员会 (PTAB);在 Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014)一案中限制软件的专利保护资格;在 TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp.Brands, LLC, 137 S. Ct.具体而言,我们使用公开交易公司样本构建公司层面的创新和各项改革风险度量指标,并采用多种差分法评估相对受影响公司与相对未受影响公司在改革后的创新相关活动有何变化。我们发现:在法院做出裁决之前,相对更容易受到专利诉讼影响的公司在 eBay 和研发支出之间存在正相关;在 PTAB 最活跃的技术领域进行创新的公司在引入 PTAB 程序和研发支出之间存在正相关;软件公司在 Alice 和研发支出之间存在正相关;此后不能在德克萨斯州东区法院(长期以来与择机选择法院有关的法院)起诉的公司在 TC Heartland 和研发支出之间存在正相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Patent law reform and innovation: An empirical assessment of the last 20 years

We ask whether four of the most important U.S. patent system reforms of the last 20 years—elimination of presumptive injunctive relief for victorious patent enforcers in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006); creation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in the America Invents Act; restriction of software’s eligibility for patent protection in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); and limitation of patent enforcers’ choice of forum in TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp. Brands, LLC, 137 S. Ct. 1514 (2017)—had a measurable impact on innovation in the U.S. Specifically, we use a sample of publicly traded firms to construct firm-level measures of innovation and exposure to each reform and adopt a variety of difference-in-differences approaches that assesses how innovation-related activities changed post-reform at relatively exposed versus relatively unexposed firms. We find: a positive association between eBay and R&D spending by firms that were relatively more exposed to patent litigation prior to the Court’s decision; a positive association between the introduction of PTAB proceedings and R&D expenditures by firms that innovate in tech classes where PTAB has been most active; a positive association between Alice and R&D spending by software firms; and a positive association between TC Heartland and R&D spending by firms that thereafter could not be sued in the Eastern District of Texas, a court long associated with opportunistic forum shopping.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
38
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The International Review of Law and Economics provides a forum for interdisciplinary research at the interface of law and economics. IRLE is international in scope and audience and particularly welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers on comparative law and economics, globalization and legal harmonization, and the endogenous emergence of legal institutions, in addition to more traditional legal topics.
期刊最新文献
Estimating the effect of concealed carry laws on murder: A response to Bondy, et al. The broken-windows theory of crime: A Bayesian approach Workload, legal doctrine, and judicial review in an authoritarian regime: A study of expropriation judgments in China Illicit enrichment in Germany: An evaluation of the reformed asset recovery regime's ability to confiscate proceeds of crime On the strategic choice of overconfident lawyers
×
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