Innovation and the exploitation of intellectual property law
This paper compares documented corporate patent practice with the way the patent institution has been modelled in economics and management writing. In particular, there is common confusion of the patent’s role as a temporary exclusive development right (correct) and the idea that the patent is a temporary economic monopoly (possible, but often not the case). This difference is important for the judgement of whether the strategy of innovation suppression can take place. A number of examples of patenting practice presented in the management literature (Dunford 1987) are shown to be examples of the development of a workable prospect rather than the abuse of the patent system to suppress innovation. The problem with the patent institution is then, not the abuse of patent-protected monopoly, but the potential for abuse of the legal machinery of the patent system. Examples of such abuse are given, including lobbying efforts to change the law to favour private control over the public interest function of intellectual property law.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
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.
|Date of creation:||01 Nov 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: The Aarhus School of Business, Fuglesangs Allé 4, DK-8210 Aarhus V, Denmark|
Phone: +45 89 48 66 88
Fax: + 45 86 15 01 88
Web page: http://www.asb.dk/about/departments/man.aspx
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kitch, Edmund W, 1977. "The Nature and Function of the Patent System," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 265-90, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhb:aardom:2003_004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Helle Vinbaek Stenholt)
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.