IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wip/wpaper/48.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The economic analysis of patent litigation data

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Helmers

Abstract

Enforceability of patent rights is the backbone of the patent system. We review differences in the way patent litigation systems are designed across jurisdictions. We also discuss challenges in collecting and accessing patent litigation data as well as their economic analysis. We provide some descriptive analysis of patent litigation in the U.S. and UK for the period 2010-2016 and 2007-2013, respectively. We also analyze administrative post-grant validity challenges in form of the inter partes review in the U.S. and oppositions at the EPO.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Helmers, 2018. "The economic analysis of patent litigation data," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 48, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    • Handle: RePEc:wip:wpaper:48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_econstat_wp_48.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harhoff, Dietmar & Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants--the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 443-480, April.
    2. Cooter, Robert D & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1989. "Economic Analysis of Legal Disputes and Their Resolution," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 1067-1097, September.
    3. Kimberlee Weatherall & Elizabeth Webster, 2014. "Patent Enforcement: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 312-343, April.
    4. Stuart Graham & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2014. "Comparing Patent Litigation Across Europe: A First Look," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/159411, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. Dumont Béatrice, 2015. "Does Patent Quality Drive Damages in Patent Lawsuits? Lessons from the French Judicial System," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 355-383, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dietmar Harhoff & Georg von Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner, 2016. "Conflict Resolution, Public Goods, and Patent Thickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 704-721, March.
    2. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2009. "Financial Patenting in Europe," NBER Working Papers 14714, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    4. Burke, Paul F. & Reitzig, Markus, 2007. "Measuring patent assessment quality--Analyzing the degree and kind of (in)consistency in patent offices' decision making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1404-1430, November.
    5. Caviggioli, Federico & Scellato, Giuseppe & Ughetto, Elisa, 2013. "International patent disputes: Evidence from oppositions at the European Patent Office," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1634-1646.
    6. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2009. "Why Challenge the Ivory Tower? New Evidence on the Basicness of Academic Patents," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 488-499, November.
    7. Rahul RK Kapoor & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2016. "The laws of action and reaction: on determinants of patent disputes in European chemical and drug industries," Working Papers TIMES² WP 2016-019, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Duplat, Valérie & Coeurderoy, Régis & Hagedoorn, John, 2018. "Contractual governance and the choice of dispute-resolution mechanisms: Evidence on technology licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1096-1110.
    9. Cédric Schneider, 2011. "The battle for patent rights in plant biotechnology: evidence from opposition fillings," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 565-579, October.
    10. Pyle, William, 2006. "Resolutions, recoveries and relationships: The evolution of payment disputes in Central and Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 317-337, June.
    11. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Catalina Martínez & Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "The impact of the abolishment of the professor’s privilege on European university-owned patents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 247-282, March.
    13. Stefan Wagner, 2008. "Business Method Patents In Europe And Their Strategic Use—Evidence From Franking Device Manufacturers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 173-194.
    14. Schumacher, Julian & Trebesch, Christoph & Enderlein, Henrik, 2021. "Sovereign defaults in court," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    15. Claude Fluet, 2009. "Accuracy Versus Falsification Costs: The Optimal Amount of Evidence under Different Procedures," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 134-156, May.
    16. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    17. Schmid, A. Allan, 1992. "Institutional Foundations of the Market Economy with Reference to the Transition Process taking Place in Eastern and Central Europe," Staff Paper Series 201152, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    18. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    19. Nikolaus Thumm & Garry Gabison, 2016. "Patent Assertion Entities in Europe: Their impact on innovation and knowledge transfer in ICT markets," JRC Research Reports JRC103321, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Lewis, Tracy R & Poitevin, Michel, 1997. "Disclosure of Information in Regulatory Proceedings," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 50-73, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wip:wpaper:48. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Economics and Statistics Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ewipoch.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.