Determinants of the Economic Use of Patented Inventions: An Analysis of European Patents

The purpose of this research is to provide empirical evidence on determinants of the economic use of patented inventions in order to contribute to the literature on technology and innovation management. The current work consists of three main parts, each of which constitutes a self-consistent research paper. The first paper uses a meta-analytic approach to review and synthesize the existing body of empirical research on the determinants of technology licensing. The second paper investigates the factors affecting the choice between the following alternative economic uses of patented inventions: pure internal use, pure licensing, and mixed use. Finally, the third paper explores the least studied option of the economic use of patented inventions, namely, the sale of patent rights. The data to empirically test the hypotheses come from a large-scale survey of European Patent inventors resident in 21 European countries, Japan, and US. The findings provided in this dissertation contribute to a better understanding of the economic use of patented inventions by expanding the limits of previous research in several different dimensions.

The Role of Patents in the Advent of Web 2.0

Given the significant impact of Web 2.0-related innovations on new Internet-based initiatives, this paper seeks to identify to what extent the main developments are protected by patents and whether patents have had a leading role in the advent of Web 2.0. The article shows that the number of patent applications filed is not that important for many of the Web 2.0 technologies in frequent use and that, of those filed, those granted are even less. The conclusion is that patents do not seem to be a relevant factor in the development of the Web 2.0 (and more generally in dynamic markets) where there is a high degree of innovation and low entry barriers for newcomers.

The secret to legal foretelling: generic and inter-generic aspects of vagueness in contracts, patents and regulations

In this genre analysis research paper, we compare U.S. patents, contracts, and regulations on technical matters with a focus upon the relation between vagueness and communicative purposes and subpurposes of these three genres. Our main interest is the investigation of intergeneric conventions across the three genres, based on the software analysis of three corpora (one for each genre, 1 million words per corpus). The result of the investigation is that intergeneric conventions are found at the level of types of expressed linguistic vagueness, but that intergeneric conventions at the level of actual formulations are rare. The conclusion is that at this latter level the influence from the situation type underlying the individual genre is more important than the overarching legal character of the genres, when we talk about introducing explicit vagueness in the text.

How vague can your patent be? Vagueness strategies in U.S. patents

Patent claims defi ne the protection scope of the intellectual property sought by the patent applicant or patentee. Broad claims are valuable as they can describe more expansive rights to the invention. Therefore, if these claims are too broad a potential infringer will more easily argue against them. But if the claims are too narrow the scope of protection of the intellectual property is greatly reduced. Patent claims have to be, on the one hand, determinate and precise enough and, on the other hand, as inclusive as possible. Therefore patent applicants must fi nd a balance in the broadness of the scope defi ned by their claims. This balance can be achieved by the choice of words with a convenient degree of semantic indeterminacy, by the choice of modifi ers or other strategies. In fact, vagueness in patent claims is a desirable characteristic for such documents. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of a corpus of 350 U.S. patents provides a promising starting point to understand the linguistic instruments used to achieve the balance between property claim scope and precision of property description. To conclude, some issues relating vagueness and pragmatics are suggested as a line of further research.

The Use of Patents to Assess National Innovation Systems: Evidences from Spanish Biotechnology

Spain’s economy recorded a high rate of growth from the mid-1990s onwards. At the same time, the resources allocated to Research and Development (R&D) grew at a much faster pace than in other European Union (EU) countries. Spain’s growth recorded an average rate of 2.93% from the early 1990s to 2004. Over the same period, the average growth in the EU was 0.46%. This circumstance, together with several sound policy decisions implemented between 2004 and 2009, ushered in a “golden age of Spanish biotechnology”. In terms of the national patent licenses issued by the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office (SPTO) between 2004 and 2009, the number in biotechnology grew from 84 to 151. However, the current economic situation in Spain, along with a series of political decisions taken over the past two or three years to cut spending on R&D, predicts a sharp downturn in the performance of Spanish biotechnology. This scenario makes Spain one of the best places to study the successes and failures of the management of science and allows transfer this experience to the other international regions. We need to analyze the influence of political decisions as a major factor with a bearing on the quality of science. Using patents as an indicator of scientific development, this paper analyzes the evolution of the biotechnology sector in Spain and its relationship with scientific policy and the management of R&D.

Patents and Economic Activity: The Need to Develop Prediction Methods for Patent Applications

Since the decade of the 1980’s the literature on economic development began paying attention to the cases of countries which were industrialized after the first industrial revolution. One of the most relevant aspects analyzed has been the role of technology as a factor which promotes or delays the process of catching up with technology leaders. As result of this interest, new and more adequate indicators were identified to provide a coherent explanation for technological activities and their relationship with economic efficiency. Although the earliest studies focused on analyzing the activities of research and development (R&D), recently the focus of analysis has shifted to another type of variables, more oriented towards the processes of innovation and the gathering of knowledge and capabilities, in which patents provide relevant information.

Horizontal Innovation and Interface Patents

Scholars understandably devote a great deal of effort to studying how well patent law works to incentive the most important inventions. After all, these inventions form the foundation of our new technological age. But very little time is spent focusing on the other end of the spectrum, inventions that are no better than what the public already has. At first blush, studying such “horizontal” innovation seems pointless. But this inquiry actually reveals much about how patents can be used in unintended, and arguably, anticompetitive ways. This issue has roots in one unintuitive aspect of patent law. Despite the law’s goal of promoting innovation, patents can be obtained on inventions that are no better than existing technology. Such patents might appear worthless, but companies regularly obtain these patents to cover interfaces. That is because interface patents actually derive value from two distinct characteristics. First, they can have “innovation value” that is based on how much better the patentedinterface is than existing technology. Second, interface patents can also have “compatibility value.” In other words, the patented technology is often essential to make products operate (i.e. compatible) with a particular interface. In practical terms, this means that an interface patent that covers little or no meaningful advance can give a company the ability to extract rents and foreclose competition. This undesirable result is a consequence of how patent law has structured its remedies. For years patent law has implicitly awarded both innovation and compatibility values. Recently, the courts have taken a sensible first step and excluded compatibility value from reasonable royalty recoveries for standard essential patents. This Article argues that the law needs to go further and do the same for all essential interface patents. Additionally, patent law should reform the way it awards injunctions and lost profits to also exclude compatibility value. This proposal has two benefits. It would eliminate the incentives for wasteful patents on horizontal technology. Second, and more importantly, the value of all interfacepatents would be better aligned with the goals of the patent system.

The Unified Court on Patents: The New Oxymoron of European Law. Egmont Paper No. 60, October 2013

None.

An annotated bibliography of patents related to coastal engineering /

"November 1979."