Decentralising the Patent System

Rassenfosse, Gaétan de; Higham, Kyle

doi:10.31235/osf.io/qzmf8

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, both the JPO and EPO have higher rates of incorrectly granted patents. 195 This finding contradicts the common assumption that a strong positive correlation exists between lenient examination and low patent quality. The authors further conclude, ''raising the U.S. standard to the level of the highest country would eliminate some low-quality patents, but perhaps not as many as some commentators believe.…”

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In recent cross-country research, de Rassenfosse et al find that stricter examination standards do not mean higher quality. 193 The authors compare the examination data of ''twin'' applications filed in the five biggest patent offices, which are the USPTO, EPO, JPO, the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). 194 The results indicate that although the JPO and EPO have the most stringent examination standards, they also have the lowest accuracy rates.…”

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…193 The authors compare the examination data of ''twin'' applications filed in the five biggest patent offices, which are the USPTO, EPO, JPO, the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). 194 The results indicate that although the JPO and EPO have the most stringent examination standards, they also have the lowest accuracy rates. In contrast, in the CNIPA, USPTO, and KIPO, which are deemed to have lower examination standards, the number of incorrectly granted patents is much lower than incorrectly refused patents.…”

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patent Quality: A Critique of the State of the Discussion

Liu

2024

IIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite decades of research and debate, the narrative that low-quality patents stifle innovation remains fraught with controversy. It is called into question because the term “patent quality” seems to be a potential misnomer, and reforms to improve patent quality are ineffective. The purpose of this study is to offer a comparative critique of the debate regarding patent quality in the European Union and the United States. It investigates five factors relating to the history of this debate, contested definitions, measurements of quality, proposals that are not implemented, and reforms that are implemented. The main contribution of this paper is to review how the debate has been constructed, indicating that certain arguments seem to talk past each other and consensus is hard to reach, that measurements are flawed, and that proposals and reforms seeking improvement seem to be treating the symptoms but not the disease. The study argues that the debate encounters a conceptual predicament characterized by substantively different conceptions of patent quality, which are influenced by differing normative expectations and assessments of patent systems. It transforms a potentially useful analytical concept into a rabbit hole. Any attempts to break the current impasse must begin with an appreciation of the different senses in which patent quality is used and an assessment of the legitimacy of their underlying normative frameworks.

show abstract

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pre-grant Proceeding Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patent Quality: A Critique of the State of the Discussion

Liu

2024

IIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…About half of this surge can be traced to a patent being filed with multiple offices, leading to large patent families (Fink, Khan and Zhou 2016). 2 The other half, however, is indicative of a genuine increase in innovation activity.…”

Section: Patenting Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing Nature of Patents in Australia

Bakhtiari

2023

Australian Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent decades have seen substantial changes to the innovation systems of major economies, not least due to a paradigm shift caused by the digital revolution. Whether smaller advanced economies such as Australia have undergone a similar shift or moved to fill the void left by other countries is unclear. This issue is important as it sets the long‐term growth path of these economies. I use Australian patent data and show that there has been a similar surge in Australia in patenting, mainly driven by medical and digital technologies. Australia, however, is showing more strength in a few niche areas. At the same time, the scope of patents, as one measure of basicness, narrowed over the years. This has been driven by private companies opting for applied research and also refocusing their innovation efforts away from chemical and material technologies and onto digital technologies and other applied areas.

show abstract

Decentralising the Patent System

Cited by 2 publications

References 23 publications

Patent Quality: A Critique of the State of the Discussion

Patent Quality: A Critique of the State of the Discussion

Changing Nature of Patents in Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About