Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations

Intellectual Property And Competition, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2019

Intellectual Property And Competition, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

A legal system that relies on private property rights to promote economic development must consider that profits can come from two different sources. First, both competition under constant technology and innovation promote economic growth by granting many of the returns to the successful developer. Competition and innovation both increase output, whether measured by quantity or quality. Second, however, profits can come from practices that reduce output, in some cases by reducing quantity, or in others by reducing innovation.

IP rights and competition policy were traditionally regarded as in conflict. IP rights create monopoly, which was thought to be inimical to …


Patent Pools And Related Technology Sharing, Erik Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2017

Patent Pools And Related Technology Sharing, Erik Hovenkamp, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

A patent "pool" is an arrangement under which patent holders in a common technology commit their patents to a single holder, who then licenses them out to the original patentees and perhaps also to outsiders. The payoffs include both revenue earned as a licensor, and technology acquired by pool members as licensees. Public effects can also be significant. For example, technology sharing of complementary patents can improve product quality and variety. In some information technology markets pools can prevent patents from becoming a costly obstacle to innovation by clearing channels of technology transfer. By contrast, a pool's aggregate output reduction …


The Rule Of Reason And The Scope Of The Patent, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2015

The Rule Of Reason And The Scope Of The Patent, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

For a century and a half the Supreme Court has described perceived patent abuses as conduct that reaches "beyond the scope of the patent." That phrase, which evokes an image of boundary lines in real property, has been applied to both government and private activity and has many different meanings. It has been used offensively to conclude that certain patent uses are unlawful because they extend beyond the scope of the patent. It is also used defensively to characterize activities as lawful if they do not extend beyond the patent's scope. In the first half of the twentieth century the …


Antitrust And The Patent System: A Reexamination, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2015

Antitrust And The Patent System: A Reexamination, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the federal antitrust laws were first passed they have cycled through extreme positions on the relationship between competition law and the patent system. Previous studies of antitrust and patents have generally assumed that patents are valid, discrete, and generally of high quality in the sense that they further innovation. As a result, increasing the returns to patenting increases the incentive to do socially valuable innovation. Further, if the returns to the patentee exceed the social losses caused by increased exclusion, the tradeoff is positive and antitrust should not interfere. If a patent does nothing to further innovation, however, then …


Anticompetitive Patent Settlements And The Supreme Court's Actavis Decision, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Nov 2013

Anticompetitive Patent Settlements And The Supreme Court's Actavis Decision, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

In FTC v. Actavis the Supreme Court held that settlement of a patent infringement suit in which the patentee of a branded pharmaceutical drug pays a generic infringer to stay out of the market may be illegal under the antitrust laws. Justice Breyer's majority opinion was surprisingly broad, in two critical senses. First, he spoke with a generality that reached far beyond the pharmaceutical generic drug disputes that have provoked numerous pay-for-delay settlements.

Second was the aggressive approach that the Court chose. The obvious alternatives were the rule that prevailed in most Circuits, that any settlement is immune from antitrust …


Competition In Information Technologies: Standards-Essential Patents, Non-Practicing Entities And Frand Bidding, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Oct 2012

Competition In Information Technologies: Standards-Essential Patents, Non-Practicing Entities And Frand Bidding, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

Standard Setting is omnipresent in networked information technologies. Virtually every cellular phone, computer, digital camera or similar device contains technologies governed by a collaboratively developed standard. If these technologies are to perform competitively, the processes by which standards are developed and implemented must be competitive. In this case attaining competitive results requires a mixture of antitrust and non-antitrust legal tools.

FRAND refers to a firm’s ex ante commitment to make its technology available at a “fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory royalty.” The FRAND commitment results from bidding to have one’s own technology selected as a standard. Typically the FRAND commitment is …


Firms' Global Patent Strategies In An Emerging Technology, Andrea Fernandez-Ribas Jan 2009

Firms' Global Patent Strategies In An Emerging Technology, Andrea Fernandez-Ribas

Andrea Fernandez-Ribas

Despite international patenting can be a costly and risky investment, an increasing number of firms patent proprietary technologies in foreign countries. This paper explores trends of global patenting in a new domain of technology characterized by rapid globalization. The research setting consists of the population of U.S.-based Large and Small and Mid-Sized firms (SMEs) filing nanotechnology-related patent applications at the World International Patent Office (WIPO) during 1996-2006.

This paper appears in: Science and Innovation Policy, 2009 Atlanta Conference on Publication Date: 2-3 Oct. 2009 On page(s): 1-5 ISBN: 978-1-4244-5041-1 INSPEC Accession Number: 11035266 DOI: 10.1109/ACSIP.2009.5367863 Posted online: 2009-12-28 12:00:57.0