IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/safewp/312400.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forum shopping and forum selling in German patent litigation: A quantitative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lehmann-Hasemeyer, Sibylle H.
  • Morell, Alexander

Abstract

Using data on all patent cases in front of German courts between 2010 and 2015 we find that plaintiffs in patentinfringement cases mainly chose the venue where to sue by the speed with which courts dispose of their cases. We also find that quality - measured, both, as the fraction of cases challenged in the next instance and the ratio of successful appeals in the year before filing - has an impact on court choice by patent plaintiffs. We can further show that plaintiffs merely shop between three German courts, namely Duesseldorf, Munich and Mannheim. Moreover, we find that once one of these three courts introduces an additional panel of three judges, thereby working faster, the other two courts increase their working speed, too. This indicates that, indeed, courts actively compete for cases. However, we do not find evidence for courts reacting to a competitor's increase in speed by deciding in the plaintiffs favor more often or by deteriorating quality of decisions. We thank the ministries of justice of the 16 German Laender for the detailed data on patent cases. Moreover, we thank Stefan Bechtold, Fabian Gaessler, Dietmar Harhoff, Lea Tochtermann, Mike Schuster, Holger Spamann, the participants of the network meeting of the DFG network "Conflict Strategies in Innovation Markets" in Mannheim (Dec. 2023), the participants of the International Meeting of Law and Economics in Bruges (Apr. 2024), seminar participants at the ETH Zurich (Apr. 2024), participants of the CELS 2024 at Emory Law School, Atlanta (Nov. 2024), and the participants of the SAFE 2025 research retreat (Jan. 2025) for their valuable comments.

Suggested Citation

  • Lehmann-Hasemeyer, Sibylle H. & Morell, Alexander, 2025. "Forum shopping and forum selling in German patent litigation: A quantitative analysis," SAFE Working Paper Series 443, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:safewp:312400
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.5150950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/312400/1/191849973X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2139/ssrn.5150950?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gaessler, Fabian & Lefouili, Yassine, 2017. "What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Analyzing Court Selection in Patent Litigation," TSE Working Papers 17-775, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2006. "A Model of Forum Shopping," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1091-1113, September.
    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. Gill, David & Sgroi, Daniel, 2008. "The Optimal Choice of Pre-launch Reviewer : How Best to Transmit Information using Tests and Conditional Pricing," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 877, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    2. Baron, Justus, 2020. "Counting standard contributions to measure the value of patent portfolios - A tale of apples and oranges," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3).
    3. Rick Harbaugh & John W. Maxwell & Beatrice Roussillon, 2011. "Label Confusion: The Groucho Effect of Uncertain Standards," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1512-1527, February.
    4. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    5. Leiponen, Aija, 2006. "Competing through cooperation: Standard setting in wireless telecommunications," Discussion Papers 1056, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    6. Kolotilin, Anton, 2015. "Experimental design to persuade," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 215-226.
    7. Vitor Trindade & Johannes Moenius, 2007. "Networks, Standards and Intellectual Property Rights," Working Papers 0705, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    8. Gill, David & Sgroi, Daniel, 2012. "The optimal choice of pre-launch reviewer," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 1247-1260.
    9. Gill, David & Sgroi, Daniel, 2008. "Sequential decisions with tests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 663-678, July.
    10. Marc Rysman & Timothy Simcoe, 2008. "Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard-Setting Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1920-1934, November.
    11. Wen, Wen & Forman, Chris & Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L, 2022. "The effects of technology standards on complementor innovations: Evidence from the IETF," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    12. Nicolas Houy & Izabela Jelovac, 2014. "Drug approval decision times, international reference pricing and strategic launches of new drugs," Working Papers halshs-01072741, HAL.
    13. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & Eggers, Felix & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2022. "Competing Standard-Setting Organizations: A Choice Experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    14. Justus Baron & Kirti Gupta, 2018. "Unpacking 3GPP standards," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 433-461, September.
    15. Matthieu Bouvard & Raphaël Levy, 2018. "Two-Sided Reputation in Certification Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4755-4774, October.
    16. Jiaming Jiang & Rajeev K. Goel & Xingyuan Zhang, 2020. "IPR policies and determinants of membership in Standard Setting Organizations: a social network analysis," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 129-154, December.
    17. Puay Khoon Toh & Cameron D. Miller, 2017. "Pawn to Save a Chariot, or Drawbridge Into the Fort? Firms' Disclosure During Standard Setting and Complementary Technologies Within Ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(11), pages 2213-2236, November.
    18. Anita Rao, 2022. "Industry-funded research and bias in food science," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 39-67, March.
    19. Pierre Larouche & Florian Schuett, 2019. "Repeated interaction in standard setting," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 488-509, June.
    20. Wen Wen & Chris Forman & Sirkka Jarvenpaa, 2014. "How Do Open Standards Influence Inventive Activity? Evidence from the IETF," Working Papers 14-20, NET Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Organizational Behavior; Intellectual Property; Litigation; Patents and Innovation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:safewp:312400. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csafede.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.