|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
|
Issue of 2022‒12‒12
three papers chosen by Giovanni Ramello Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” |
| By: | Gamarra, Yanis; Friedl, Gunther |
| Abstract: | Technology standards such as the Wi-Fi or 5G mobile communication standard rely on standard-essential patents (SEPs). Increasing licensing revenues and several disputes between owners and users of SEPs raise the question about the patenting behavior of firms developing standardized technologies. A better understanding of this patenting behavior can help to improve the standard-setting process and standard adoption. We propose the average total costs per patent family as an economic assessment criterion and an indicator of patenting behavior for technology standards. Using this criterion, we examine how increasing SEP family portfolios and their ownership concentration are associated with firms' patenting behavior. We find that increasing ownership concentration of SEP families is negatively associated with firms' average total costs per patent family, suggesting that decreasing competition around SEP families might decrease firms' investments per patent family. We conclude that policy makers and standardsetting organizations (SSOs) should discourage blanket declarations since increasing SEP transparency could improve comparability across standard-setting processes and reduce uncertainties in subsequent standard adoption for SEP holders and implementers. SSOs should further closely monitor how increasing (decreasing) ownership concentration of SEPs affects their standard-setting processes. |
| Keywords: | Average total costs,standardization,standard-essential patents,patenting,R&D |
| JEL: | L15 L96 O32 O34 |
| Date: | 2022 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:itse22:265630&r=ipr |
| By: | Rimmer, Matthew (Queensland University of Technology) |
| Abstract: | Refereed article - Matthew Rimmer. "Metal 3D Printing: Patent Law, Trade Secrets, and Additive Manufacturing" Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (2022) Available at: http://works.bepress.com/matthew_rimmer/385/ https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frma.2022.958761/full Abstract There has been significant investment in research and development in respect of metal 3D printing in the United States (as well as a number of other jurisdictions). There has been growing conflict over the ownership of intellectual property in respect of metal 3D printing (involving not only patents but also trade secrets and confidential information, as well as contract law and unfair competition). In 2018, Desktop Metal Inc. launched litigation against Markforged Inc. and Matiu Parangi in relation to intellectual property and metal 3D printing in the United States. As well as complaints of patent infringement, Desktop Metal Inc. has alleged that the defendants had engaged in acts of trade secret misappropriation, unfair and deceptive business practices, and breach of contract. Markforged Inc. made various counter-claims of its own. In July 2018, a Federal Jury found that Markforged Inc. did not infringe two patents held by its rival Desktop Metal Inc. Claims of further violations of trade secrets and contract law were also considered. In the end, the dispute was settled, with neither party obtaining an advantage in the litigation. There was further conflict over whether the terms of the settlement in respect of non-disparagement were honoured. The parties have also faced further intellectual property conflict. In 2021, Continuous Composites has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Markforged Inc. In 2021, Desktop Metal Inc. brought legal action against SprintRay in Germany. Drawing upon this case study, this paper considers whether metal 3D printing will disrupt patent law, policy, and practice. It also explores the tension between the use of trade secrets in commercial 3D printing (such as in metal 3D Printing), and the open source ethos of the Maker Movement. This paper considers the larger implications of this intellectual property dispute over metal 3D printing for scarcity, regulation, and the abundance society. |
| Date: | 2022–09–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:yhbu6&r=ipr |
| By: | Leogrande, Angelo; Costantiello, Alberto; Laureti, Lucio |
| Abstract: | We investigate the innovational determinants of “Patent Applications” in Europe. We use data from the European Innovation Scoreboard-EIS of the European Commission for 36 countries in the period 2010-2019. We use Panel Data with Fixed Effects, Panel Data with Random Effects, Pooled OLS, WLS and Dynamic Panel. We found that the variables that have a deeper positive association with “Patent Applications” are “Human Resources” and “Intellectual Assets”, while the variables that show a more intense negative relation with Patent Applications are “Employment Share in Manufacturing” and “Total Entrepreneurial Activity”. A cluster analysis with the k-Means algorithm optimized with the Silhouette Coefficient has been realized. The results show the presence of two clusters. A network analysis with the distance of Manhattan has been performed and we find three different complex network structures. Finally, a comparison is made among eight machine learning algorithms for the prediction of the future value of the “Patent Applications”. We found that PNN-Probabilistic Neural Network is the best performing algorithm. Using PNN the results show that the mean future value of “Patent Applications” in the estimated countries is expected to decrease of -0.1%. |
| Keywords: | Innovation, and Invention: Processes and Incentives; Management of Technological Innovation and R&D; Diffusion Processes; Open Innovation. |
| JEL: | O30 O31 O32 O33 O34 |
| Date: | 2022–11–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:115346&r=ipr |