Private Agreements for Coordinating Patent Rights: The Case of Patent Pools
Inventors and users of technology often enter into cooperative agreements for sharing their intellectual property in order to implement a standard or to avoid costly infringement litigation. Over the past two decades, U.S. antitrust authorities have viewed pooling arrangements that integrate complementary, valid and essential patents to have â€œpro-competitive benefitsâ€ in reducing prices, transactions costs, and the incidence of costly infringement suits. Since patent pools are cooperative agreements, they also have the potential of suppressing competition if, for example, they harbor weak or invalid patents, dampen incentives to conduct research on innovations that compete with the pooled patents, foreclose competition from downstream product or upstream innovation markets, or raise prices on goods that compete with the pooled patents. In synthesizing the ideas advanced in the economic literature, this paper explores whether these antitrust concerns apply to pools with complementary patents. Special attention is given to the U.S. Department of Justice-Federal Trade Commission Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (1995) and its application to recent patent pool cases.
|Date of creation:||17 Nov 2010|
|Date of revision:||17 Nov 2010|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.economics.ubc.ca/|
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.:
- Ryan L. Lampe & Petra Moser, 2009. "Do Patent Pools Encourage Innovation? Evidence from the 19th-Century Sewing Machine Industry," NBER Working Papers 15061, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Michael D. Whinston, 1989.
"Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion,"
NBER Working Papers
2995, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002.
"Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?,"
Law and Economics
- Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nancy Gallini and Suzanne Scotchmer., 2001. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," Economics Working Papers E01-303, University of California at Berkeley.
- Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2003. "Intellectual Property: When is it the Best Incentive System?," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000532, David K. Levine.
- Gallini, Nancy & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9wx2c2hz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Fershtman, C. & Kamien, M.I., 1991.
"Cross Licensing of Complementary Technologies,"
1-91, Tel Aviv.
- Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2002.
"Efficient Patent Pools,"
NBER Working Papers
9175, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Delcamp, Henry, 2015. "Are patent pools a way to help patent owners enforce their rights?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 68-76.
- Sunil Kanwar & Robert E Evanson, 2004.
"Does Intellectual Property Protection Spur Technological Change?,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
122247000000000455, David K. Levine.
- Sunil Kanwar & Robert Evenson, 2003. "Does intellectual property protection spur technological change?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 235-264, April.
- Sunil Kanwar & Robert Evenson, 2001. "Does Intellectual Property Protection Spur Technological Change," Working Papers 831, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
- Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005.
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
- Boldrin,Michele & Levine,David K., 2008.
"Against Intellectual Monopoly,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521879286, October.
- Aoki, Reiko & Schiff, Aaron, 2007. "Promoting Access to Intellectual Property: Patent Pools, Copyright Collectives and Clearinghouses," PIE/CIS Discussion Paper 334, Center for Intergenerational Studies, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
- Schiff, Aaron & Aoki, Reiko, 2007.
"Differentiated Standards and Patent Pools,"
PIE/CIS Discussion Paper
336, Center for Intergenerational Studies, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
- Vianney Dequiedt & Bruno Versaevel, 2007.
"Patent Pools and the Dynamic Incentives to R&D,"
- Bruno Versaevel & Vianney Dequiedt, 2007. "Patent Pools and the Dynamic Incentives to R&D," Working Papers 0703, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique (GATE), Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Université Lyon 2, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
- Dequiedt, V. & Versaevel, B., 2004. "Patent pools and the dynamic incentives to R&D," Working Papers 200412, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
- Gallini, Nancy T, 1984. "Deterrence by Market Sharing: A Strategic Incentive for Licensing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 931-941, December.
- Vianney Dequiedt & Bruno Versaevel, 2013.
"Patent pools and dynamic R&D incentives,"
- Luis Cabral & David Salant, 2008.
"Evolving Technologies and Standards Regulation,"
08-16, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
- Sunil Kanwar, 2010.
"Intellectual Property Protection and the Licensing of Technology to Developing Countries,"
188, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
- Sunil Kanwar, 2010. "Intellectual Property Protection and the Licensing of Technology to Developing Countries," Working Papers id:2830, eSocialSciences.
- Shavell, S. & van Ypersele de Strihou, T.P.M.C., 1999.
"Rewards versus intellectual property rights,"
1999-26, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- SHAVELL, Steven & VAN YPERSELE, Tanguy, "undated". "Rewards versus intellectual property rights," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1597, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Steven Shavell & Tanguy van Ypersele, 1999. "Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights," NBER Working Papers 6956, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Sung-Hwan Kim, 2004. "Vertical Structure and Patent Pools," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 25(3), pages 231-250, 07.
- James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009.
"Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635.
- James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Introduction to Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk," Introductory Chapters, in: Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk Princeton University Press.
- Jay Pil Choi & Heiko Gerlach, 2014.
"Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects,"
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 899-924, December.
- Kremer, Michael R., 1998. "Patent Buyouts: A Mechanism for Encouraging Innovation," Scholarly Articles 3693705, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Jay Pil Choi, 2005. "Live and Let Live: A Tale of Weak Patents," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 724-733, 04/05.
- Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2001. "Markets for Technology and Their Implications for Corporate Strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 419-451, June.
- Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
- Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2010. "Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 472-503.
- Mukesh Eswaran & Nancy Gallini, 1996. "Patent Policy and the Direction of Technological Change," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 722-746, Winter.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ubc:bricol:nancy_gallini-2010-34. 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: (Maureen Chin)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.