Patent Licensing, Technology Transfer, and Innovation
Author(s) -
Mark A. Lemley,
Robin Feldman
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
american economic review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 16.936
H-Index - 297
eISSN - 1944-7981
pISSN - 0002-8282
DOI - 10.1257/aer.p20161092
Subject(s) - commercialization , technology transfer , patent law , industrial organization , product (mathematics) , business , economics , product innovation , new product development , intellectual property , law and economics , marketing , international trade , law , political science , geometry , mathematics
Traditional justifications for patents are based on direct or indirect contribution to product creation. Non-practicing entities (NPEs) might provide such innovation, either directly, through working the patent or transfer of technology to others who do, or indirectly, when others copy. Available evidence suggests, however, that ex post licensing demands from NPEs do not normally involve these activities. Some have argued that patents are valuable without01/technology transfer because the ability to exclude may drive commercialization that would not otherwise occur. We demonstrate that even if commercialization theories sometimes justify patent protection, they cannot justify most NPE lawsuits or licensing demands.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom