Patent litigation precaution method: Analyzing characteristics of US litigated and non-litigated patents from 1976 to 2010

Scientometrics

Volumn 92, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 181-195

  Su, Hsin Ning ^a   Chen, Carey Ming Li ^b   Lee, Pei Chun ^b  

^a NATIONAL CHUNG HSING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Logistic model; Patent characteristics; Patent litigation; Precaution

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862683099     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0716-7     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Agliardi, E., & Agliardi, R. (2011). An application of fuzzy methods to evaluate a patent under the chance of litigation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 13143-13148.
2. Albert, M. B., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research Policy, 20(3), 251-259. doi: 10. 1016/0048-7333(91)90055-U.
3. Allison, J., Lemley, M., Moore, K., & Trunkey, R. (2004). Valuable patents. The Georgetown Law Journal, 92, 435.
4. Allison, J. R., Lemley, M., & Walker, J. (2009). Extreme value or trolls on top? The characteristics of the most-litigated patents. 158 U PA L REV 1, 5, 1-37.
5. Bessen, J., & Meurer, M. (2005). The patent litigation explosion. Boston University School of Law Working Paper No. 05-18.
6. Bessen, J., & Meurer, M. J. (2007). What's wrong with the patent system? Fuzzy boundaries and the patent tax. First Monday, 12(6). http://firstmonday. org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index. php/fm/article/view/1867/1750. Accessed 4 June 2007.
7. Bessen, J., & Meurer, M. J. (2008). Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8. Cook, J. P. (2007). On understanding the increase in us patent litigation. American Law and Economics Review, 9(1), 48.
9. Cremers, K. (2009). Settlement during patent litigation trials. An empirical analysis for Germany. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(2), 182-195.
10. Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999). Science and technology as predictors of stock performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(3), 20-32.
11. Dixit, A. K., Pindyck, R. S., & Davis, G. A. (1994). Investment under uncertainty (Vol. 15). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12. Ernst, H., & Omland, N. (2010). The patent asset index-A new approach to benchmark patent portfolios. World Patent Information.
13. FTI Consulting. (2011). Retrieved from www. fticonsulting. com/global/resources/documents/2010-intellectual-property-statistics. pdf.
14. Gallini, N. T. (1992). Patent policy and costly imitation. The RAND Journal of Economics, 23(1), 52-63.
15. Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The value of European patents. European Management Review, 5(2), 69-84.
16. Gibbs, A. (2005). Application of multiple known determinants to evaluate legal, commercial and technical value of a patent. Technical Representative, Patent cafe.
17. Gilbert, R., & Shapiro, C. (1990). Optimal patent length and breadth. The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 106-112.
18. Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics Letters, 69(1), 109-114. doi: 10. 1016/S0165-1765(00)00265-2.
19. Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data. Research Policy, 30(8), 1253-1266.
20. Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979-1995. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101-128.
21. Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2007). An empirical analysis of patent litigation in the semiconductor industry. University of California at Berkeley working paper.
22. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36, 16-38.
23. Harhoff, D., & Reitzig, M. (2004). Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants-The case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 22(4), 443-480.
24. Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343-1363.
25. Hirschey, M., & Richardson, V. J. (2001). Valuation effects of patent quality: A comparison for Japanese and US firms. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 9(1), 65-82.
26. Hirschey, M., & Richardson, V. J. (2004). Are scientific indicators of patent quality useful to investors? Journal of Empirical Finance, 11(1), 91-107.
27. Intellogist. (2011). LitAlert. Retrieved from http://www. intellogist. com/wiki/LitAlert.
28. Klemperer, P. (1990). How broad should the scope of patent protection be? The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 113-130.
29. Lanjouw, J. (1998). Patent protection in the shadow of infringement: Simulation estimations of patent value. Review of Economic Studies, 65(4), 671-710.
30. Lanjouw, J., & Schankerman, M. (1997). Stylized facts of patent litigation: Value, scope and ownership. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.
31. Lanjouw, J., & Schankerman, M. (2001). Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. The Rand Journal of Economics, 32(1), 129-151.
32. Lanjouw, J., Pakes, A., & Putnam, J. (1998). How to count patents and value intellectual property: The uses of patent renewal and application data. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(4), 405-432. doi: 10. 1111/1467-6451. 00081.
33. Lee, Y.-G. (2009). What affects a patent's value? An analysis of variables that affect technological, direct economic, and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach. Scientometrics, 79(3), 623-633. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-007-2020-5.
34. Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. The RAND Journal of Economics, 25(2), 319-333.
35. Marco, A. C. (2005). The option value of patent litigation: Theory and evidence. Review of Financial Economics, 14(3-4), 323-351.
36. Martinez-Ruiz, A., & Aluja, T. (2008). Structural model of patent and market value: An application in energy patents. Presented at the DRUID-DIME Academy Winter 2008 PhD Conference.
37. Merz, J. F., & Pace, N. M. (1994). Trends in patent litigation: The apparent influence of strengthened patents attributable to the court of appeals for the Federal circuit. Journal Patent & Trademark Office Society, 76, 579.
38. Moore, K. A. (2000). Judges, Juries, and patent cases-An Empirical peek inside the black box. Michigan Law Review, 99, 365.
39. Narin, F., Hamilton, K. S., & Olivastro, D. (1997). The increasing linkage between US technology and public science. Research Policy, 26(3), 317-330.
40. Reitzig, M. (2004). Improving patent valuations for management purposes-Validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales. Research Policy, 33(6-7), 939-957.
41. Reitzig, M., Henkel, J., & Heath, C. (2007). On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey-Unrealistic damage awards and firms' strategies of. Research Policy, 36(1), 134-154.
42. Scherer, F. M. (1965). Firm size, market structure, opportunity, and the output of patented inventions. The American Economic Review, 55(5), 1097-1125.
43. Scotchmer, S. (1996). Protecting early innovators: Should second-generation products be patentable? The Rand Journal of Economics, 27(2), 322-331.
44. Scotchmer, S., & Green, J. (1990). Novelty and disclosure in patent law. The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 131-146.
45. Silverberg, G., & Verspagen, B. (2007). The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance. Journal of Econometrics, 139(2), 318-339.
46. Somaya, D. (2003). Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 24(1), 17-38.
47. Suzuki, J. (2011). Structural modeling of the value of patent. Research Policy, 40(7), 986-1000. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2011. 05. 006.
48. Tang, V., & Huang, B. (2002). Patent litigation as a leading market indicator. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 1(3), 280-291. doi: 10. 1504/IJTTC. 2002. 001789.
49. Tong, X., & Frame, J. D. (1994). Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data. Research Policy, 23(2), 133-141.
50. Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 21, 172-187.
51. Trappey, A. J. C., Trappey, C. V., Wu, C.-Y., & Lin, C.-W. (2012). A patent quality analysis for innovative technology and product development. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 26(1), 26-34. doi: 10. 1016/j. aei. 2011. 06. 005.
52. van Looy, B., Du Plessis, M., & Magerman, T. (2006). Data production methods for harmonized patent statistics: Patentee sector allocation. Belgium: Leuven.
53. von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., & Rost, K. (2005). Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Research Policy, 34(10), 1591-1607. doi: 10. 1016/j. respol. 2005. 08. 001.
54. WIPO. (2008). WIPO IPC-Technology Concordance Table. Retrieved September 22, 2011. From http://www. wipo. int/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/pdf/wipo_ipc_technology. pdf.
55. Zhang, X., Fang, S., Tang, C., Xiao, G. H., Hu, Z. Y., & Gao, L. D. (2009). Study on indicator system for core patent documents evaluation. Presented at the 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Retrieved from http://www. issi2009. org/agendas/issiprogram/public/documents/indicator%20system%20on%20core%20patent%20evaluation-101829. pdf.