|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
|
Issue of 2021‒08‒23
three papers chosen by Giovanni Ramello Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” |
| By: | Giovanni Dosi; Luigi Marengo; Jacopo Staccioli; Maria Enrica Virgillito |
| Abstract: | Are IPRs institutions meant to foster innovative activities or conversely to secure appropriation and profitability? Taking stock of a long-term empirical evidence on the pharmaceutical sector in the US, we can hardly support IPRs intended as an innovation rewarding institution. According to our analysis, pharma patents have constituted legal barriers to protect intellectual monopolies rather than an incentive and a reward to innovative efforts. Patenting strategies appear to be quite aggressive in extending knowledge borders and enlarging the space protected from the possibility of infringements. This is also witnessed by the fact that patent applications are very skewed in the covered trade names and patent thickness expands over time. Conversely, the number of patents protecting new drugs approved by the FDA which draw upon government-sponsored research - as such a mark for quality - falls. Firm-level analysis on profitability confirms strong correlation, restricted to listed pharmaceutical firms, between patent portfolio and profit margins. |
| Keywords: | Intellectual property rights; patents; pharmaceutical industry. |
| Date: | 2021–08–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2021/26&r= |
| By: | Rimmer, Matthew (Queensland University of Technology) |
| Abstract: | Considering recent litigation in the Australian courts, and an inquiry by the Productivity Commission, this paper calls for patent law reform in respect of the right to repair in Australia. It provides an evaluation of the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2019] FCAFC 115 – as well as the High Court of Australia consideration of the matter in Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2020] HCA 41. It highlights the divergence between the layers of the Australian legal system on the topic of patent law – between the judicial approach of the Federal Court of Australia and the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, and the endorsement of the patent exhaustion doctrine by the majority of the High Court of Australia. In light of this litigation, this paper reviews the policy approach taken by the Productivity Commission in respect of patent law, the right to repair, consumer rights, and competition policy. After the considering the findings of the Productivity Commission, it is recommended that there is a need to provide for greater recognition of the right to repair under patent law. It also calls for the use of compulsory licensing, crown use, competition oversight, and consumer law protection to reinforce the right to repair under patent law. In the spirit of modernising Australia’s regime, this paper makes a number of recommendations for patent law reform – particularly in light of 3D printing, additive manufacturing, and digital fabrication. It calls upon the legal system to embody some of the ideals, which have been embedded in the Maker’s Bill of Rights, and the iFixit Repair Manifesto. The larger argument of the paper is that there needs to be a common approach to the right to repair across the various domains of intellectual property – rather than the current fragmentary treatment of the topic. |
| Date: | 2021–08–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:9kft4&r= |
| By: | Kerstin H\"otte; Su Jung Jee; Sugandha Srivastav |
| Abstract: | Technologies help adapt to climate change but little systematic research about these technologies and their interaction with mitigation exists. We identify climate change adaptation technologies (CCATs) in US patent data to study the technological frontier in adaptation. We find that patenting in CCATs was roughly stagnant over the past decades. CCATs form two main clusters: (1) science-intensive CCATs related to agriculture, health and monitoring technologies; and (2) engineering-based for coastal, water and infrastructure adaptation. 25% of CCATs help in climate change mitigation, and we infer that synergies can be maximized through well designed policy. CCATs rely more on public R&D than other inventions, and CCAT patents are citing more science over time, indicating a growing relevance of research as a knowledge source for innovation. Policymakers can use these results to get greater clarity on where R&D support for CCATs can be directed. |
| Date: | 2021–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2108.03722&r= |