Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Tilting the Table? The Use of Preliminary Injunctions

Contents:

Author Info

  • Lanjouw, Jean O
  • Lerner, Josh

Abstract

This paper examines the economic role of preliminary injunctions in legal disputes. We present a model in which differences in financing costs drive the use of preliminary injunction and explore the implications of this legal remedy for ex post efficiency and ex ante incentives. Controlling for the nature of the dispute, we examine the relationships between the financial status of litigating parties and whether a preliminary injunction is requested. The empirical analysis uses detailed data compiled for a sample of 252 patent suits and reveals patterns generally consistent with those suggested by the model. Copyright 2001 by the University of Chicago.

Download Info

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Law & Economics.

Volume (Year): 44 (2001)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
Pages: 573-603

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:44:y:2001:i:2:p:573-603

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE/

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Becker-Blease, John R., 2011. "Governance and innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 947-958, September.
  2. Francesco SCHETTINO & Alessandro STERLACCHINI, 2007. "European Patenting and the Size of Inventors," Working Papers 308, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
  3. Gilbert, Richard J & Katz, Michael L, 2009. "Efficient Division of Profits from Complementary Innovations," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt5mr0s11v, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  4. Josh Lerner, 2008. "The Litigation of Financial Innovations," NBER Working Papers 14324, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Patent Thickets and the Market for Innovation: Evidence from Settlement of Patent Disputes," CEP Discussion Papers dp0889, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  6. Alberto Galasso, 2007. "Broad Cross-License Agreements andPersuasive Patent Litigation: Theory andEvidence from the Semiconductor Industry," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 45, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
  7. Gerald Marschke & Jinyoung Kim, 2002. "Accounting for the recent surge in U.S. patenting: Changes in R&D expenditures, patent yields, and the high tech sector," Discussion Papers 02-10, University at Albany, SUNY, Department of Economics.
  8. Gilbert, Richard J & Katz, Michael L, 2007. "Should Good Patents Come in Small Packages? A Welfare Analysis of Intellectual Property Bundling," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt59x0t6tv, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  9. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2008. "Patent Thickets and the Market for Innovation: Evidence from Settlement of Patent Disputes," CEPR Discussion Papers 6946, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Ganslandt, Mattias, 2008. "Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy," Working Paper Series 726, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
  11. Julien Pénin, 2003. "Patents versus ex-post rewards: a new look," Working Papers of BETA 2003-09, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  12. Josh Lerner, 2003. "The Patent System and Competition," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000577, David K. Levine.
  13. Patrick Cohendet & Matthieu Farcot & Julien Pénin, 2009. "Intellectual property in a knowledge-based economy : Patents to include vs. patents to exclude," Working Papers of BETA 2009-15, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  14. Cremers, Katrin, 2004. "Determinants of Patent Litigation in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-72, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:44:y:2001:i:2:p:573-603

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.