American Law and Economics Review Advance Access originally published online on June 1, 2007
American Law and Economics Review 2007 9(1):48-71; doi:10.1093/aler/ahm003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On Understanding the Increase in U.S. Patent Litigation
NERA Economic Consulting
Send correspondence to: Joseph P. Cook, National Economic Research Associates, Inc., 50 Main Street, White Plains, NY 10606, USA; E-mail: joseph.cook{at}nera.com.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Patent litigation in the United States has increased dramatically in the last 20 years. Understanding this increase, and the concomitant increase in patent grants, can help us to better understand the sources of technological innovation and productivity. The approach described here provides a means to simultaneously examine both the "friendly court" hypothesis and the hypothesis of an increase in research productivity associated with the information age. The results support the notion that both hypothesized factors, changes in court outcomes and increased research productivity and the associated increase in patenting activity, have played a role in the growth of patent litigation.
I wish to acknowledge many helpful conversations with Cagatay Koc, as well as comments from participants at the annual conference of the American Law & Economics Association, my colleagues at NERA, Russ O'Haver, Jim Griffin, Badi Baltagi, David Drukker, and the editor and two anonymous referees—as well as research assistance from Ben Chee, Sarah Dixon, and Amity Swank. Of course, any remaining errors are my own.