Author(s)
Source
Boston University School of Law, Law and Economics Research Paper No. 12-34, 2012
Summary
The authors empirically study the direct costs resulting from NPE litigation and its negative impact on innovation.
Policy Relevance
The large cost that results from NPE litigation is a social problem because it results in a tax on innovation. Better patent notice and patent policy will likely be the required solutions to address the problem because NPEs tend to be heterogeneous rather than homogenous.
Main Points
-
NPEs (non-practicing entities) are parties who own and sometimes assert patents but do not practice the technology covered by their patent.
-
Direct costs include the cost of legal services, license fees, and other direct cost in response to NPE litigation risk.
-
NPE litigation has been around for a long time but recent litigation has exploded to an unprecedented level and scope.
-
Previous literature suggested that NPEs provide a social benefit by helping small innovators access the market; but, the authors’ previous study and this one debunk that assertion and find that many NPE lawsuits are a social loss.
-
Notice failure is a common theme in NPE lawsuits, especially software, whereas the effectiveness of notice in chemical and pharmaceutical inventions is high and the patent system works well for those industries.
-
One notable problem for NPE litigation relating to smaller firms is that legal defense costs represent a greater proportion of their overall revenue, thus making it more costly for them than for larger firms.
-
The data show NPE litigation does not help small innovators.
-
Possible biases and miscalculation concerns raised by the data set are addressed by the authors and explained or refuted.
-
NPE litigation is a problem because NPE direct costs, estimated to be about $29 billion by this paper, are essentially a tax on innovation.