Patent Quality and Pro-patent Policy

Koki Arai

doi:10.4067/S0718-27242010000400001

Authors

Koki Arai CPRC & JFTC

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242010000400001

Keywords:

patent quality, pro-patent, Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium

Abstract

This paper analyzes the patent examination and litigation process in terms of a simple Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium model, and interprets the results in line with real pro-patent trends in the US and other countries. Each country’s pro-patent policy option is different from the other because of reflecting its own path-dependent patent situation. That is, when a country adopts an easy patent policy (a pro-patent policy), firms in the country gain larger payoffs in the short term. Hence, every country seeks to adopt an easy patent policy. However, the easy patent policy undermines the true invention incentive. In this situation, it is difficult for any country to escape the problem, depending on the historical inertia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

CAILLAUD, B., Duchene, A. (2010). Patent Office in Innovation Policy: Nobody's Perfect, International Journal of Industrial Organization, forthcoming.

CHIOU, J.-Y. (2008). The Patent Quality Control Process: Can We Afford An (Rationally) Ignorant Patent Office? SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract= 1099948 [Accessed 12/11/2010].

FARRELL, J., Shapiro C. (2008). How strong are weak patents? American Economic Review 98, I 347-1 369.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION (2003). To Promote Innovation: A Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy.

LEMLEY, M. (2001). Rational ignorance at the patent office, Northwestern University Law Review 95, 1495-1529.

LEMLEY, M., Shapiro C. (2005). Probabilistic patents, Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, 75-98.

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (2004). A Patent System for the 21st Century.

Policy Committee on Innovation and Intellectual Property of Japan Patent Office (2008) New Intellectual Property Policy for Pro-Innovation - Intellectual Property System as Global Infrastructure-.

SHAPIRO, C. (2003). Antitrust Limits to Patent Settlements, RAND Journal of Economics 34, 391-41 I.

TAKAKURA, S. (2008). Review of the Recent Trend in Patent Litigation from the Viewpoint of Innovation, http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/columns/aO I 0242.html [Accessed 12/11/2010].

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE (2003). The 21st Century Strategic Plan, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/strat21 /index.htm

YASUDA, F. (2010). Outline of Patent Prosecution Highway, (in Japanese), http://www.jpo.go.Jp/torikumi/t torikumi/pdf/highway user seminar/jpo happyo.pdf [Accessed 12/1 1/2010].