Essential patents and standard dynamics

Baron, Justus; Pohlmann, Tim; Blind, Knut

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.05.004

Cited by 78 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Academic studies include Rysman and Simcoe (2008), Kang and Bekkers (2015), Baron, Pohlmann, and Blind (2016), Kuhn, Roin, and Thompson (2016) and a number of others cited below. For an example of a court that used declared essential patent counts to apportion royalties, see In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, No.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disclosure Rules and Declared Essential Patents

Catalini

Martinelli

Righi

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many standard setting organizations (SSOs) require participants to disclose patents that might be infringed by implementing a proposed standard, and commit to license their "essential" patents on terms that are at least fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND). Data from these SSO intellectual property disclosures have been used in academic studies to provide a window into the standard setting process, and in legal proceedings to assess parties' relative contributions to a standard. We develop a simple model of the disclosure process to illustrate the link between SSO rules and patent-holder incentives, and examine some of the model's predictions using a novel dataset constructed from the disclosure archives of thirteen major SSOs. The central message of the paper is that subtle differences in the rules used by different SSOs can influence which patents are disclosed, the terms of licensing commitments, and ultimately long-run citation and litigation rates for the underlying patents.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disclosure Rules and Declared Essential Patents

Catalini

Martinelli

Righi

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others argue that FRAND commitments enable technology implementers to deliberately avoid seeking licenses for SEPs (hold‐out argument). Moreover, the fragmentation of SEP ownership might lead to an excessively high royalty stack (royalty stacking argument) (Baron et al ., ).…”

Section: Standard Setting and Frand Licensingmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Role of Patents in Information and Communication Technologies: A Survey of the Literature

Comino

Manenti

Thumm

2018

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last few decades, the number of patents in information and communication technologies has increased considerably. An increasing number of patents and the associated fragmentation of IP rights have generated a series of potentially problematic consequences. Patent thickets, royalty stacking, the emergence of patent assertion entities, increased patent litigationparticularly around standard essential patents -and the difficulties with defining fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory licensing terms are some of the most debated issues in the literature that we review in this paper. We devote a specific section of our survey to patent quality, currently one of the most debated issues surrounding the patent system. In our analysis, we mix theoretical and empirical arguments with a more policy-oriented reasoning. This allows us to better position the different issues in the relevant political and economic context.

show abstract

“…It is not clear, however, the degree to which patents were declared essential to the H.265 standard or what impact, if any, those patents may have had on these decisions. Baron et al (2013) analyzed 3500 standards released between 1998 and 2008 and found that higher concentrations of SEPs caused standards to be less likely to be replaced, but increased the likelihood that they would be upgraded through new version releases. They attribute this effect to frictions and vested interests in existing patented technologies (i.e., a lock-in effect based on SEP ownership).…”

Section: Effect Of Patents On Standardization Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When less formal consortia are counted, Updegrove (2015) catalogs nearly 1,000 standards-development groups operating in various fields. The increasing prominence of consortia in the standards-development world, and the impact of consortia on innovation in standardized technologies, is analyzed along various axes of accountability, transparency, efficiency, consensus and flexibility by Updegrove (1995), Egyedi (2001a), Baron and Pohlmann (2013), Bar jurisdictions is summarized, among others, in assorted chapters of NRC (2013) and Contreras (2017). Even with this degree of selectivity, the literature of standards, standardization and IP is too large and rapidly developing to cover comprehensively in this chapter.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Technical standards, standards-setting organizations, and intellectual property: a survey of the literature (with an emphasis on empirical approaches)

Contreras

2019

Research Handbook on the Economics of Intellectual Property Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Essential patents and standard dynamics

Cited by 78 publications

References 27 publications

Disclosure Rules and Declared Essential Patents

Disclosure Rules and Declared Essential Patents

The Role of Patents in Information and Communication Technologies: A Survey of the Literature

Technical standards, standards-setting organizations, and intellectual property: a survey of the literature (with an emphasis on empirical approaches)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About