首页> 外文OA文献 >Why challenge the ivory tower? New evidence on the basicness of academic patents
【2h】

Why challenge the ivory tower? New evidence on the basicness of academic patents

机译:为什么要挑战象牙塔?学术专利基础性的新证据

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

While often presumed in academic literature and policy discussions there is little empirical evidence showing that academic patents protect more basic inventions than corporate patents. This study provides new evidence on the basicness of academic patents using German professor patents linked to patent opposition data from the European Patent Office (EPO). Patent oppositions are the most important mechanism by which the validity of patents filed at the EPO can be challenged. Controlling for patent value, asymmetric information and diverging expectations between the opposition parties, the likelihood of a potentially litigious situation and the relative costs of opposition versus settlement, we find that academic patents are opposed less frequently than a control group of corporate patents. This suggests that academic patents cover rather basic inventions with a low immediate commercial value not threatening current returns of potential plaintiffs. The effect is weaker for academic patents filed in collaboration with the business sector, which suggests that those patents are evaluated as more applied by owners of potentially rival technologies.
机译:尽管经常在学术文​​献和政策讨论中推论,但很少有经验证据表明学术专利比公司专利保护更多的基础发明。这项研究为使用德国教授专利与欧洲专利局(EPO)的专利异议数据相关的学术专利的基础性提供了新的证据。专利异议是可以质疑在EPO申请专利的有效性的最重要机制。在控制专利价值,不对称信息和异议方之间的期望分歧,潜在诉讼情况的可能性以及异议与和解的相对成本方面,我们发现,与公司专利对照组相比,对学术专利的反对频率较低。这表明,学术专利涵盖了相当低的直接商业价值的相当基本的发明,而没有威胁到潜在原告的当前回报。与商业部门合作申请的学术专利的影响较弱,这表明那些潜在竞争技术的所有者认为这些专利被更多地申请。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号