The Experts below are selected from a list of 34758 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Charles A Garris - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the united states Patent System an essential role in engineering design education
Journal of Engineering Education, 2001Co-Authors: Charles A GarrisAbstract:The Patent System has long been a neglected tool in the education of American engineers. Four propositions are presented which support the notion that an understanding of Patents should be an integral part of the education of every engineer who practices in the United States. The essay lays a philosophical and historical foundation explaining the role of the Patent System in a competitive free-market society, and how it influences the behavior of those who seek to innovate. An upper-level design course offered at The George Washington University, which heavily utilizes the Patent literature and provides a foundation for understanding the role of Patents in American industry, is discussed in detail. Ethical dilemmas facing engineers in the heat of competition are analyzed in the course, and the essay discusses some of these. This essay concludes with a discussion of why the role of Patents in engineering education should increase in the twenty-first century.
Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Economic incongruities in the European Patent System
European Journal of Law and Economics, 2011Co-Authors: Malwina Mejer, Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La PotterieAbstract:This article suggests that the consequences of the ‘fragmentation’ of the European Patent System are more dramatic than the mere prohibitive costs of maintaining a Patent in force in many jurisdictions. The prevalence of national jurisdictions, which are highly heterogeneous in their costs and practices, over the validity and enforcement of European Patents, induces a high level of uncertainty and an intense managerial complexity which reduce both the effectiveness and the attractiveness of the European Patent System in its mission to stimulate innovation.
-
Economic incongruities in the European Patent System
2009Co-Authors: Malwina Mejer, Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La PotterieAbstract:This article argues that the consequences of the �fragmentation� of the European Patent System are more dramatic than the mere prohibitive costs of maintaining a Patent in force in many jurisdictions. The prevalence of national jurisdictions, which are highly heterogeneous in their costs and practices, over the validity and enforcement of European Patents induces both a high level of uncertainty and an intense managerial complexity which undoubtedly reduces both the effectiveness and the attractiveness of the European Patent System in its mission to stimulate innovation.
-
economic incongruities in the european Patent System
2009Co-Authors: Malwina Mejer, Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La PotterieAbstract:This paper argues that the consequences of the ‘fragmentation’ of the European Patent System are more dramatic than the mere prohibitive costs of maintaining a Patent in force in many jurisdictions. First, detailed analysis of judicial Systems in several European countries and four case studies provide evidence suggesting that heterogeneous national litigation costs, practices and outcome induce a high level of uncertainty. Second, a high degree of managerial complexity results from Systemic incongruities due to easier ‘parallel imports’, possible ‘time paradoxes’ and the de facto paradox of having EU-level competition policy and granting authority ultimately facing national jurisdictional primacy on Patent issues. These high degrees of uncertainty and complexity contribute to reduce the effectiveness of the European Patent System and provide additional arguments in favour of the Community Patent and a centralized litigation in Europe.
-
Policy recommendations for the Belgian Patent System
World Patent Information, 2008Co-Authors: Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie, Siska Vandecandelaere, Emmanuele De BéthuneAbstract:This article presents 10 broad policy recommendations aiming at improving the awareness and a sound use of the Patent System in Belgium. This exercise was motivated by the relatively low reliance on the Patent System in Belgium, by both applicants and inventors. The main objective was not to stimulate 'blindly' the filing of more Patents applications, but to ensure that inventions that should be protected are indeed Patented. The recommendations are structured around four main pillars: (i) improve access at lower costs; (ii) improve awareness through training; (iii) improve information; and (iv) improve visibility of Belgium as a European actor. Concluding remarks underline the importance of involving the social partners for an effective implementation and the need for a cost-benefit evaluation of several recommendations.
-
The Economics of the European Patent System: IP Policy for Innovation and Competition
OUP Catalogue, 2007Co-Authors: Dominique Guellec, Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La PotterieAbstract:Why does society allow, or even encourage, private appropriation of inventions? When do Patents encourage competition, when do they hamper it? How should society design the compromise between the interest of the inventor and the interest of the users of Patented inventions? How should the Patent System adapt to new technological areas? These questions and many more are addressed by the authors in this groundbreaking analysis of the economics behind the European Patent System. Beginning with the history and principles of the Patent System, the book then examines the economic effects of Patenting on innovation and the diffusion of technology and growth. Throughout the book the theory and the reality are discussed alongside real world examples and comparison between the European, USA, and Japanese Patent Systems.
Sam Meng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A New Design for the Patent System
Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 2019Co-Authors: Sam MengAbstract:Protection of Patents is a double-edged sword—while it encourages innovation it causes deadweight loss due to monopolistic production of Patented products. The current approach to minimizing the deadweight loss is a compromised one—providing weak Patent protection in order to strike a balance between the positive and negative effects of Patent rights. Through a scrutiny of the purpose and mechanism of Patent protection, this paper suggests a new design for the Patent System. This new design aims to stimulate innovation directly while minimizing deadweight loss.
-
A new Patent System to usher in a new economy
Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2019Co-Authors: Sam Meng, George ChenAbstract:This paper shows that economic recessions result from a scarcity of product innovations attributable to the flawed balanced approach of the current Patent System. While rejecting the balanced appro...
Mark A. Lemley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Surprising Resilience of the Patent System
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Mark A. LemleyAbstract:The Patent System seems in the midst of truly dramatic change. The last twenty years have seen the rise of a new business model – the Patent troll – that grew to become a majority of all Patent lawsuits. They have seen a significant expansion in the number of Patents granted and a fundamental change in the industries in which those Patents are filed. They have seen the passage of the most important legislative reform in the last sixty years, a law that reoriented legal challenges to Patents away from courts and toward the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). And they have seen remarkable changes in nearly every important legal doctrine, from Patent eligibility to obviousness to infringement to remedies. These changes have prompted alarm in a number of quarters. From the 1990s to the 2000s, as the number of Patents and Patent troll suits skyrocketed, technology companies and academics worried about the “crisis” in the Patent System – a crisis of overprotection that might interfere with rather than promote innovation. By 2015, as Patent reform took effect and the Supreme Court undid many of the Federal Circuit’s expansions of Patent rights, it was Patent owners who were speaking of a crisis in the Patent System – a crisis of underprotection that might leave innovators without adequate protection. Depending on one’s perspective, then, the sky seems to have been falling on the Patent System for some time. Despite the undeniable significance of these changes in both directions, something curious has happened to the fundamental characteristics of the Patent ecoSystem during this period: very little. Whether we look at the number of Patent applications filed, the number of Patents issued, the number of lawsuits filed, the Patentee win rate in those lawsuits, or the market for Patent licenses, the data show very little evidence that Patent owners and challengers are behaving differently because of changes in the law. The Patent System, then, seems surprisingly resilient to changes in the law. This is a puzzle. In this article, I document this phenomenon and give some thought to why the fundamental characteristics of the Patent System seem resistant to even major changes in Patent law and procedure. The results pose some profound questions not only for efforts at Patent reform but for the role of the Patent System in society as a whole.
-
Courts and the Patent System
2009Co-Authors: Dan L. Burk, Mark A. LemleyAbstract:Innovation and Patent law work differently in different industries. To some degree, the courts’ interpretations of Patent and trademark law accommodate those differences. It is not much of an exaggeration to say that the Patent System must bend or break: a Patent System that is not flexible enough to account for these industry differences is unlikely to survive, let along accomplish its stated goals. We believe the System has the flexibility to do both, but this will require the courts to better recognize and use the policy levers they have been given.
-
The Growing Complexity of the United States Patent System
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2001Co-Authors: John R. Allison, Mark A. LemleyAbstract:In this Article, we compare a data set of 1000 U.S. Patents issued between 1996 and 1998 to a similarly random sample of 1000 Patents issued twenty years earlier, between 1976 and 1978. By studying the differences between the groups, we can get a clear picture of how the Patent System has changed over time. The results are dramatic. By almost any measure - subject matter, time spent in prosecution, number of prior art references cited, number of claims, number of continuation applications filed, number of inventors - the Patents issued in the late 1990s are more complex than those issued in the 1970s. While some of these effects are attributable to the Patenting of new technologies like biotechnology and software, unknown in the early 1970s, the increase in complexity is robust even across areas of technology. Further, the Patent System in the 1990s is more heterogeneous than it was in the 1970s. There are far greater differences by area of technology and by nationality in how Patents are being prosecuted in the 1990s than there were in the 1970s. We explore a number of possible explanations for these results, and discuss the policy implications of the lack of uniformity that now characterizes our Patent System.
George Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A new Patent System to usher in a new economy
Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2019Co-Authors: Sam Meng, George ChenAbstract:This paper shows that economic recessions result from a scarcity of product innovations attributable to the flawed balanced approach of the current Patent System. While rejecting the balanced appro...