误导性学术是如何将个人发明人的专利执法良性故事扭曲成“专利流氓”寓言的

R. D. Katznelson
{"title":"误导性学术是如何将个人发明人的专利执法良性故事扭曲成“专利流氓”寓言的","authors":"R. D. Katznelson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2583330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the widely publicized campaign to curb purported “patent troll�? litigation abuses, there are many anecdotal stories on non-practicing entities’ (“NPE�?) alleged abusive patent assertions. In view of the paucity of accurate accounts of the real stories behind these “patent troll�? stories, this paper exposes the machinery used to manufacture one of these fictional “patent troll�? fables — profoundly misleading scholarship. The real circumstances of two independent inventors’ virtuous patent licensing and enforcement efforts in the medical imaging industry are presented; including their ultimate partnering with an established NPE to license more than a dozen accused infringing companies. Unfortunately, this story was retold under the “patent troll�? narrative in a misleading scholarly article purporting to document a cessation of new medical imaging product introductions and reduction of sales by the accused companies after they were sued. The article argues that the patent litigation caused significant reduction of incremental innovation. Through the detailed examination of the article and the facts of the case, it is shown here that the article’s biased analysis, omission of critical highly relevant data, use of inappropriate and biased controls, and speculative legal and business counterfactuals led to erroneous inferences, fully invalidating its conclusions.","PeriodicalId":421837,"journal":{"name":"Diffusion of Innovation eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Misleading Scholarship Contorted an Individual Inventors' Story of Virtuous Patent Enforcement into a 'Patent Troll' Fable\",\"authors\":\"R. D. Katznelson\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2583330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the widely publicized campaign to curb purported “patent troll�? litigation abuses, there are many anecdotal stories on non-practicing entities’ (“NPE�?) alleged abusive patent assertions. In view of the paucity of accurate accounts of the real stories behind these “patent troll�? stories, this paper exposes the machinery used to manufacture one of these fictional “patent troll�? fables — profoundly misleading scholarship. The real circumstances of two independent inventors’ virtuous patent licensing and enforcement efforts in the medical imaging industry are presented; including their ultimate partnering with an established NPE to license more than a dozen accused infringing companies. Unfortunately, this story was retold under the “patent troll�? narrative in a misleading scholarly article purporting to document a cessation of new medical imaging product introductions and reduction of sales by the accused companies after they were sued. The article argues that the patent litigation caused significant reduction of incremental innovation. Through the detailed examination of the article and the facts of the case, it is shown here that the article’s biased analysis, omission of critical highly relevant data, use of inappropriate and biased controls, and speculative legal and business counterfactuals led to erroneous inferences, fully invalidating its conclusions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":421837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diffusion of Innovation eJournal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diffusion of Innovation eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2583330\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diffusion of Innovation eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2583330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在广泛宣传的遏制所谓“专利流氓”的运动中?在诉讼滥用方面,有许多关于非执业实体(“NPE”)涉嫌滥用专利主张的轶事故事。鉴于缺乏对这些“专利流氓”背后真实故事的准确报道。故事,这篇文章揭露了用来制造这些虚构的“专利流氓”的机器。寓言——极具误导性的学术。介绍了医学影像行业中两位独立发明人的良性专利许可与执行的真实情况;包括他们最终与一家老牌NPE合作,授权十多家被指控侵权的公司。不幸的是,这个故事在“专利流氓”的名义下被重述。在一篇误导性的学术文章中叙述,旨在记录被告公司在被起诉后停止推出新的医学成像产品并减少销售。文章认为,专利诉讼导致了渐进式创新的显著减少。通过对文章和案件事实的详细审查,这里显示了文章的偏见分析,遗漏了关键的高度相关数据,使用了不适当和有偏见的控制,以及投机的法律和商业反事实导致了错误的推论,完全使其结论无效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Misleading Scholarship Contorted an Individual Inventors' Story of Virtuous Patent Enforcement into a 'Patent Troll' Fable
In the widely publicized campaign to curb purported “patent troll�? litigation abuses, there are many anecdotal stories on non-practicing entities’ (“NPE�?) alleged abusive patent assertions. In view of the paucity of accurate accounts of the real stories behind these “patent troll�? stories, this paper exposes the machinery used to manufacture one of these fictional “patent troll�? fables — profoundly misleading scholarship. The real circumstances of two independent inventors’ virtuous patent licensing and enforcement efforts in the medical imaging industry are presented; including their ultimate partnering with an established NPE to license more than a dozen accused infringing companies. Unfortunately, this story was retold under the “patent troll�? narrative in a misleading scholarly article purporting to document a cessation of new medical imaging product introductions and reduction of sales by the accused companies after they were sued. The article argues that the patent litigation caused significant reduction of incremental innovation. Through the detailed examination of the article and the facts of the case, it is shown here that the article’s biased analysis, omission of critical highly relevant data, use of inappropriate and biased controls, and speculative legal and business counterfactuals led to erroneous inferences, fully invalidating its conclusions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信