|
on Technology and Industrial Dynamics |
| By: | Gilbert, Richard J |
| Abstract: | Very large awards and settlements for patent infringement have increased dramatically since the 1980s. A large fraction of these awards have occurred in the computer hardware and software industries. Complex technologies such as computer hardware and software require rights to a very large number of patents. One explanation for the large awards for patent infringement is the bargaining power of a patentee that has a credible injunction threat for a product that requires rights to multiple patents. This can lead to infringement damage awards and settlements that overestimate the patent’s contribution to product value. |
| Keywords: | patents, infringement, damages, innovation |
| Date: | 2010–02–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cdl:compol:1141506&r=tid |
| By: | Gilbert, Richard |
| Abstract: | In their recent book, Against Intellectual Monopoly, Michele Boldrin and David Levine conclude that patents and copyrights are not necessary to provide protection for either innovation or creative expression and should be eliminated. The authors note the many flaws of the U.S. system of intellectual property protection and argue that other means are available to appropriate the benefits of invention and creative expression. However, the authors overlook important functions of intellectual property. Their efforts would be put to better use by more carefully analyzing policy proposals that may improve our system of intellectual property rights and have some potential to be implemented. |
| Keywords: | intellectual property, patent, copyright |
| Date: | 2010–02–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cdl:compol:1141498&r=tid |
| By: | Bronwyn H. Hall; Christian Helmers |
| Abstract: | Global climate change mitigation will require the development and diffusion of a large number and variety of new technologies. How will patent protection affect this process? In this paper we first review the evidence on the role of patents for innovation and international technology transfer in general. The literature suggests that patent protection in a host country encourages technology transfer to that country but that its impact on innovation and development is much more ambiguous. We then discuss the implications of these findings and other technology-specific evidence for the diffusion of climate change-related technologies. We conclude that the “double externality” problem, that is the presence of both environmental and knowledge externalities, implies that IP may not be the ideal and cannot be the only policy instrument to encourage innovation in this area and that the range and variety of green technologies as well as the need for local adaptation of technologies means that patent protection may be neither available nor useful in some settings. |
| Keywords: | Climate change; intellectual property; innovation; technology transfer |
| JEL: | D1 I2 O1 O3 |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:csa:wpaper:2010-23&r=tid |