Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
    • 指導教授
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 管理學院
  3. 資訊管理學系
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/48775
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor孔令傑(Ling-Chieh Kung)
dc.contributor.authorCheng-Yuan Chengen
dc.contributor.author鄭証元zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-15T11:09:10Z-
dc.date.issued2021
dc.date.submitted2021-04-14
dc.identifier.citationAllison, J. R., and Hunter, S. D. (2006). On the Feasibility of Improving Patent Quality One Technology at a Time: The Case of Business Methods. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 729-794.
Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., Moore, K. A., and Trunkey, R. D. (2003). Valuable patents. Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 92(3), pp. 435-480.
Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., and Walker, J. (2011). Patent quality and settlement among repeat patent litigants. Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 99(3), pp. 677-712.
Altera, A. G. (1993). Expanding the Reissue Procedure: A Better Way to Do Business. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, Vol. 1, pp. 185-218.
Ansell L., Arad R., Branch D., Lee H. Y., Pasha A., and Robinson P. (2018). 2018 Patent Litigation Study. https://www.ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/2018-pwc-patent-litigation-study.pdf (Accessed on 20 May 2019).
Barry, C., Arad, R., Ansell, L., Cartier, M., and Lee, H. (2018). 2017 Patent Litigation Study Change on the horizon? http://www.ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2017-Patent-Litigation-Study_PwC.pdf (Accessed on 14 February 2018).
Bergek, A., and Bruzelius, M. (2010). Are patents with multiple inventors from different countries a good indicator of international R D collaboration? The case of ABB, Research Policy. Vol. 39(10), pp. 1321-1334.
Bergmann, I., Butzke, D., Walter, L., Fuerste, J., Moehrle, M., and Erdmann, V. (2008). Evaluating the risk of patent infringement by means of semantic patent analysis: The case of DNA chips. R D Management, Vol. 38(5), pp. 550-562.
Bessen, J. (2008). The value of US patents by owner and patent characteristics, Research Policy. Vol. 37(5), pp. 932-945.
Bhagat, S., Brickley, J. A., and Coles, J. L. (1994). The costs of inefficient bargaining and financial distress: Evidence from corporate lawsuits. Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 35(2), pp. 221-247.
Bielen, S., Marneffe, W., Grajzl, P., and Dimitrova-Grajzl, V. (2018). The duration of judicial deliberation: Evidence from Belgium. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, Vol. 174(2), pp. 303-333.
Bloomberg (2017). Qualcomm Says Apple Breached Contract on Phone-Chip Software. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-02/qualcomm-accuses-apple-of-phone-chip-software-contract-breach (Accessed on 11 May 2019).
Bosche, A., Crawford, D., Jackson, D., Schallehn, M., and Smith, P. (2016). How Providers Can Succeed in the Internet of Things. Bain Insights, Munich, 122.
Che, H. C., Wang, S. Y., and Lai, Y. H. (2010). Assessment of patent legal value by regression and back-propagation neural network. International Journal of Systematic Innovation, Vol. 1(1), pp. 32-48.
Chen, S., Xu, H., Liu, D., Hu, B., and Wang, H. (2014). A vision of IoT: Applications, challenges, and opportunities with china perspective. IEEE Internet of Things journal, Vol. 1(4), pp. 349-359.
Cheng, C. Y. K., and Kung, L. C. (2019a). Evaluation of innovation risk through patent risk factors: an empirical approach. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, Vol. 9(4), pp. 414-429.
Cheng, C. Y. K., and Kung, L.C. (2019b). Identifying risk factors to predict patent infringement risk of IoT products. Working paper.
Chien, C. V. (2011). Predicting patent litigation. Texas Law Review, Vol. 90(2), pp. 283-329.
Chien, C., and Reines, E. (2014). Why Technology Customers Are Being Sued En Masse for Patent Infringement and What Can Be Done. Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 49(1), pp. 235-260.
Chisum, D. (1971). The allocation of jurisdiction between state and federal courts in patent litigation. Washington Law Review, Vol. 46(4), pp. 633-674.
Cremers, K., Ernicke, M., Gaessler, F., Harhoff, D., Helmers, C., McDonagh, L., Schliessler1, P., and Van Zeebroeck, N. (2017). Patent litigation in Europe. European Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 44(1), pp. 1-44.
CTIMES (2013). Largan Sued Samsung for Infringing Six Patents. https://en.ctimes.com.tw/DispNews.asp?O=HJXBK6NUMIQSAA00NW (Accessed on 11 May 2019).
David L Schwartz (2012). The Rise of Contingent Fee Representation in Patent Litigation. Alabama Law Review, Vol. 64(2), pp. 335-388.
DIGITIMES (2016). Genius Electronic Optical settles patent lawsuit with Largan Precision http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20161202PD202.html (Accessed on 15 February 2020).
Ernst, H., Legler, S., and Lichtenthaler, U. (2010). Determinants of patent value: Insights from a simulation analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 77(1), pp. 1-19.
EPO (2011). FAQ - Patent management and valuation. https://www.epo.org/service-support/faq/searching-patents/valuation.html#faq-136 (Accessed on 29 August 2017).
Federal Judicial Center (2019). https://www.fjc.gov/research/idb/civil-cases-filed-terminated-and-pending-sy-1988-present (Accessed on 13 December 2019)
Fisch, C., Sandner, P., and Regner, L. (2017). The value of Chinese patents: An empirical investigation of citation lags. China Economic Review, Vol. 45, pp. 22-34.
Fischer, T., and Leidinger, J. (2014). Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value-An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions. Research Policy, Vol. 43(3), pp. 519-529.
Graf, S. W. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis Clark Law Review, Vol. 11(2007), pp. 495-519.
Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., and Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 29(7), pp. 1645-1660.
Guellec, D., and de la Potterie, B. V. P. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics Letters, Vol. 69(1), pp. 109-114.
Haddud, A., DeSouza, A., Khare, A., and Lee, H. (2017). Examining potential benefits and challenges associated with the Internet of Things integration in supply chains. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 28(8), pp. 1055-1085.
Hall, B. H. (2004). Exploring the patent explosion. The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 30(1-2), pp. 35-48.
Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., and Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 36(1), pp. 1-50.
Hall, B. H., Thoma, G. and Torrisi, S. (2007). The Market Value of Patents and R D: Evidence from European Firms. NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 13426.
Hallikas, J., Karvonen, I., Pulkkinen, U., Virolainen, V. M., and Tuominen, M. (2004). Risk management processes in supplier networks. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 90(1), pp. 47-58.
Hamzehzadeh, B. (2010). Repeat Player vs. One-Shotter: Is Victory all that Obvious. Hastings Business Law Journal, Vol. 6(1), pp. 239-260.
Han, E. J., and Sohn, S. Y. (2015). Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 40(5), pp. 821-839.
Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., and Vopel, K., (2003). Citations, family size, opposite-on and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, Vol. 32(8), pp. 1343-1363.
Harris, D., Hermann, K., Bawa, R., and Cleveland, J. T. (2004). Strategies for resolving patent disputes over nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Nanotechnology Law and Business, Vol. 1(4), pp. 1-18.
IAM (2014). Alice decision a big reason for sharp fall in US patent litigation, says Mark Lemley. https://www.iam-media.com/law-policy/alice-decision-big-reason-sharp-fall-us-patent-litigation-says-mark-lemley (Accessed on 16 April 2020).
IHS Technology (2016). IoT platforms: enabling the Internet of Things. https://cdn.ihs.com/www/pdf/enabling-IOT.pdf (Accessed on 11 April 2018).
Indukuri, K. V., Ambekar, A. A., and Sureka, A. (2007). Similarity analysis of patent claims using natural language processing techniques. In International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Multimedia Applications (ICCIMA 2007) (Vol. 4, pp. 169-175). IEEE.
IoT analytics (2018). The Top 10 IoT Segments in 2018 – based on 1,600 real IoT projects. https://iot-analytics.com/top-10-iot-segments-2018-real-iot-projects (Accessed on 11 April 2018).
Janicke, P. M., and Ren, L. (2006). Who wins patent infringement cases. AIPLA Quarterly Journal, Vol. 34(1), pp. 1-44.
Kesan, J. P., and Ball, G. G. (2006). How Are Patent Cases Resolved-An Empirical Examination of the Adjudication and Settlement of Patent Disputes. Washington University Law Review, 84(2), pp. 237-312.
Kim, Y., Tian, Y., Jeong, Y., Jihee, R., and Myaeng, S. H. (2009). Automatic discovery of technology trends from patent text. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (pp. 1480-1487).
Lai, Y. H., and Che, H. C. (2009). Evaluating patents using damage awards of infringement lawsuits: A case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 26(3), pp. 167-180.
Lai, Y. H., Che, H. C., and Wang, S. Y. (2008a). Integrated evaluator extracted from infringement lawsuits using Back Propagation Neural Network. In Wavelet Analysis and Pattern Recognition, 2008. ICWAPR'08. International Conference on (Vol. 1, pp. 237-248). IEEE.
Lai, Y. H., Che, H. C., and Wang, S. Y. (2008b). Managing Patent Legal Value via Fuzzy Neural Network Incorporated with Factor Analysis Based on Patent Infringement Lawsuits, Paper Presented at the In Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, 2008. WiCOM,08. 4th International Conference on. 12-14 Oct. 2008. Dalian, China.
Lanjouw, J. O., and Schankerman, M. (1997). Stylized facts of patent litigation: Value, scope and ownership. NBER Working paper No.6297. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Lanjouw, J. O., and Schankerman, M. (2001). Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition. The RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 32(1), pp. 129-151.
Lanjouw, J.O., and Schankerman, M. (2003). Enforcing patent rights: an empirical study. Paper presented at Empirical Economics of Innovation and Patenting, Mannheim, Germany, 14–15 March.
Lee, C., Song, B., and Park, Y. (2013). How to assess patent infringement risks: a semantic patent claim analysis using dependency relationships. Technology Analysis Strategic Management, Vol. 25(1), pp. 23-38.
Lemley, M. A., and Moore, K. A. (2004). Ending abuse of patent continuations. https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt9wq259tk/qt9wq259tk.pdf (Accessed on 16 February 2017).
Lerner, J. (1995). Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors. The Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 38(2), pp. 463-495.
Li, F., and Xiong, P. (2013). Practical secure communication for integrating wireless sensor networks into the internet of things. IEEE Sensors Journal, Vol. 13(10), pp. 3677-3684.
Li, S., Da Xu, L., and Zhao, S. (2015). The internet of things: a survey. Information Systems Frontiers, Vol. 17(2), pp. 243-259.
Liang, Y., and Tan, R. (2007). A text-mining-based patent analysis in product innovative process. Trends in computer aided innovation. Springer, Boston, MA, 2007, pp. 89-96.
Lu, J. J. (2012). The myths and facts of patent troll and excessive payment: have nonpracticing entities (NPEs) been overcompensated? Business Economics, Vol 47, pp. 234-249.
Lucero, S. (2016). IoT platforms: enabling the Internet of Things, IHS Technology. https://cdn.ihs.com/www/pdf/enabling-IOT.pdf (Accessed on 22 Feb 2018).
Malackowski, J. E., and Barney, J. A. (2008). What Is Patent Quality--A Merchant Banc’s Perspective. Nouvelles-Journal of the Licensing Executives Society, Vol. 43(2), pp. 123-134.
McKinsey Global Institute (2015). The internet of things: mapping the value beyond the hype. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/McKinsey%20Digital/Our%20Insights/The%20Internet%20of%20Things%20The%20value%20of%20digitizing%20the%20physical%20world/The-Internet-of-things-Mapping-the-value-beyond-the-hype.ashx (Accessed on 20 April 2018).
Meurer, M. J. (2017). Allocating Patent Litigation Risk across the Supply Chain. Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, Vol. 25, pp. 251-276.
Moehrle, M. G., Wustmans, M., and Gerken, J. M. (2017). How business methods accompany technological innovations–a case study using semantic patent analysis and a novel informetric measure. R D Management, Vol. 48(3), pp. 331-342
Odasso, C., Scellato, G., and Ughetto, E. (2014). Selling patents at auction: an empirical analysis of patent value. Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 24(2), pp. 417-438.
Park, H., Yoon, J., and Kim, K. (2011). Identifying patent infringement using SAO based semantic technological similarities. Scientometrics, Vol. 90(2), pp. 515-529.
Peng, Y. S., and Liang, I. C. (2016). A dynamic framework for competitor identification: A neglecting role of dominant design. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69(5), pp. 1898-1903.
Perel, M. (2014). An Ex Ante Theory of Patent Valuation: Transforming Patent Quality into Patent Value. Journal of High Technology Law, Vol. 14, pp. 148-236.
Proudfoot, J. R. (2005). The evolution of synthetic oral drug properties. Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry Letters, Vol. 15(4), pp. 1087-1090.
Reitzig, M. (2003). What determines patent value? Insights from the semiconductor industry. Research Policy, Vol. 32(1), pp. 13-26.
Reitzig, M. (2004). Improving patent valuations for management purposes—validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales. Research Policy, Vol. 33(6), pp. 939-957.
Reitzig, M., Henkel, J. and Heath, C. (2007). On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey - unrealistic damage awards and firms, strategies of being infringed. Research Policy, Vol. 36(1), pp. 134-154.
RPX (2018). 2017 in Review: A Year of Transition. http://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/2017-in-review-a-year-of-transition/ (Accessed on 16 April 2020).
Saito, M. (2012). HTC 'happy' with Apple settlement, slams media estimates https://www.reuters.com/article/htc-apple/htc-happy-with-apple-settlement-slams-media-estimates-idINDEE8AJ06120121120 (Accessed on 10 January 2019).
Schankerman, M., and Pakes, A. (1986). Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries During the Post-1950 Period. The Economic Journal, Vol. 96(384), pp. 1052-1076.
Simmons, E. S. (2009). Black sheep in the patent family. World Patent Information, Vol. 31(1), pp. 11-18.
Sneed, K. A., and Johnson, D. K. (2009). Selling ideas: the determinants of patent value in an auction environment. R D Management, Vol. 39(1), pp. 87-94.
Song, K., Kim, K. S., and Lee, S. (2017). Discovering new technology opportunities based on patents: Text-mining and F-term analysis. Technovation, Vol. 60, pp. 1-14.
Songer, D. R., and Sheehan, R. S. (1992). Who wins on appeal? Upperdogs and underdogs in the United States courts of appeals. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 235-258.
Spurr, S. J. (1997). The duration of litigation. Law and Policy, Vol. 19(3), pp. 285-316.
Statista (2015). Size of the global Internet of Things (IoT) market from 2009 to 2019 (in billion U.S. dollars) https://www.statista.com/statistics/485136/global-internet-of-things-market-size (Accessed on 23 Feb 2018).
Statista (2018). Number of connected wearable devices worldwide from 2016 to 2021 (in millions). https://www.statista.com/statistics/487291/global-connected-wearable-devices (Accessed on 11 April 2018).
Strengers, Y., and Nicholls, L. (2017). Convenience and energy consumption in the smart home of the future: Industry visions from australia and beyond. Energy Research Social Science, Vol. 32, pp. 86-93.
Su, H. N., Chen, C. M. L., and Lee, P. C. (2012). Patent litigation precaution method: analyzing characteristics of US litigated and non-litigated patents from 1976 to 2010. Scientometrics, Vol. 92(1), pp. 181-195.
Szmer, J., Songer, D. R., and Bowie, J. (2016). Party Capability and the US Courts of Appeals: Understanding why the “haves” win. Journal of Law and Courts, Vol. 4(1), pp. 65-102.
TechiExpert (2018). Internet of things : Intelligent home. https://www.techiexpert.com/internet-of-things-intelligent-home (Accessed on 11 April 2018).
Thomson Reuters (2010). Taiwanese LCD maker files second suit against Sony. https://www.reuters.com/article/chimei-sony-idUKN2321804920100823 (Accessed on 20 May 2018).
TIME (2008). Best Inventions of 2008. http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1852747_1854195_1854158,00.html (Accessed on 20 May 2018).
Trappey, A. J., Chen, L. W., and Trappey, C. V. (2015). Computer supported formal concept analysis to explore the evolution of patent litigation. In Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), 2015 IEEE 19th International Conference on (pp. 534-539). IEEE.
Trappey, A. J., Trappey, C. V., Wu, C. Y., and Lin, C. W. (2012). A patent quality analysis for innovative technology and product development. Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 26(1), pp. 26-34.
U.S. Courts (2018). U.S. District Courts - Median Time From Filing to Disposition of Civil Cases, by Action Taken. https://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/c-5/statistical-tables-federal-judiciary/2018/12/31 (Accessed on 20 May 2019).
USPTO (2011). Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Implementation. https://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/leahy-smith-america-invents-act-implementation (Accessed on 27 December 2017).
USPTO (2015). 1120 Eighteen - Month Publication of Patent Applications [R-07.2015]. http: //www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1120.html (Accessed on 7 July 2017).
USPTO (2019). Patent Litigation Docket Reports Data. https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/electronic-data-products/patent-litigation-docket-reports-data (Accessed on 10 December 2019).
Vincent, C., Taylor-Adams, S., Chapman, E. J., Hewett, D., Prior, S., Strange, P., and Tizzard, A. (2000). How to investigate and analyse clinical incidents: clinical risk unit and association of litigation and risk management protocol. British Medical Journal, Vol. 320(7237), pp. 777-781.
Von Graevenitz, G., Hall, B. H., Helmers, C., and Rosazza Bondibene, C. (2013). A study of patent thickets. Intellectual Property Office UK.
Wang, S., Lee, W. C., Lei, Z., Zhang, X., and Kuo, Y. H. (2014). Exploring technological trends for patent evaluation. In Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA), 2014 International Conference on (pp. 277-283).
Weber, R. H. (2010). Internet of Things–New security and privacy challenges. Computer Law Security Review, Vol. 26(1), pp. 23-30.
Wheeler, S., Cartwright, B., Kagan, R. A., and Friedman, L. M. (1987). Do the Haves Come out Ahead-Winning and Losing in State Supreme Courts, 1870-1970. Law and Society Review, Vol. 21(3), pp. 403-445.
Willis, T. S. (2004). Patent Reexamination Post Litigation: It’s Time to Set the Rules Straight. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, Vol. 12(2), pp. 597-620.
Wongchaisuwat, P., Klabjan, D., and McGinnis, J. O. (2016). Predicting litigation likelihood and time to litigation for patents. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1603/1603.07394.pdf (Accessed on 15 May 2019).
Wongchaisuwat, P., Klabjan, D., and McGinnis, J. O. (2017). Predicting litigation likelihood and time to litigation for patents. In Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law (pp. 257-260).
WIPO (2017). International Patent Classification (IPC) https://www.wipo.int/classifications/ipc/en/ (Accessed on 27 December 2017).
WP-Forge and WordPress (2018). IoT Smart City – What is Smart Home? http://www.infiniteinformationtechnology.com/iot-smart-city-what-is-smart-home (Accessed on 11 May 2018).
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/48775-
dc.description.abstract創新不僅可以創造產品與服務的價值,更是企業提升競爭力的良方。但是,創新往往會面臨許多障礙而無法前進,例如技術瓶頸、市場趨勢與成本等,而企業在創新上現在還面臨了更具殺傷力的潛在障礙:專利侵權。專利權人可以透過訴訟禁止他人未經其授權而製造、販賣邀約、販賣、使用與基於前述目的的進口等行為。因此,近年來許多專利權人將專利權做為商業競爭武器,對競爭對手甚至是下游客戶發起專利侵權訴訟,以取得其競爭優勢地位。
  在本論文中,我們透過檢視美國專利特徵與美國專利侵權訴訟間的相關性,藉此來定義出專利風險因子,並以羅吉斯迴歸分析進行量化分析來評估專利侵權風險。經分析,本論文所定義的專利訴訟風險因子對於專利訴訟是有顯著影響。透過本論文的研究發現,企業可以藉由這些專利風險因子的影響方式來制定產品與專利布局的策略,並藉此來避免或降低被競爭對手控訴專利侵權風險,甚或是增加控訴競爭對手專利侵權的機率,如此即可有效降低企業創新的專利侵權風險並提升競爭力。
  近年來,最火熱的議題之一就是物聯網(IoT),而市場上物聯網的相關產品也已經開始蓬勃發展,許多報導也紛紛預測物聯網產業具有數十億到數百億美元的龐大商機。然而,與此同時也有許多研究指出物聯網的發展可能因為有隱私權與安全性的問題而受限。此外,我們調查發現物聯網相關的專利侵權訴訟也呈現上升的趨勢,因此物聯網的相關企業在產品發展上不可忽視專利侵權所帶來的營運風險。為了瞭解物聯網產業的專利訴訟風險,我們藉由分析美國物聯網相關專利的特徵與美國物聯網相關專利侵權訴訟後,建立假設並識別物聯網的風險因子後再以羅吉斯迴歸分析進行驗證。分析結果顯示,本論文所識別的物聯網專利風險因子確實對於美國物聯網專利侵權訴訟有顯著影響。基於此分析結果,物聯網的相關企業不僅可以建立具嚇阻性的專利策略以提升競爭力,以及迴避競爭對手的高風險專利以降低專利侵權風險。另外,值得一提的是,物聯網的專利風險因子與不分產業的專利風險因子略有不同,因此在分析不同產業或產品的專利侵權風險時,識別具有產業或產品特徵的專利風險因子是有其必要性的。
  對企業而言,強化專利的強度以增加對競爭對手的專利侵權風險,雖然可大幅降低競爭對手的競爭,但仍無法完全避免專利侵權發生,因此採取訴訟以排除競爭對手的不當競爭仍是必要的選項之一。然而,法律訴訟耗時又耗力且訴訟時間越長成本越高,美國的訴訟成本更是經常高達數百萬美元,對參與其中的企業都是相當沉重的負擔。所以當企業採用訴訟手段來排除侵權與競爭時,若能精確的評估訴訟時間,除了能有效控管訴訟成本外更能有助於及早擬定訴訟後的各項營運策略,進而增加企業的競爭力。因此我們延伸上述研究以探討專利訴訟時間的影響因子。本論文識別出數個專利訴訟時間影響因子,並進行迴歸分析。結果顯示,本論文所識別的專利訴訟時間影響因子確實對於美國專利侵權訴訟時間有顯著影響。
  企業若能將本論文所提的專利風險因子與專利訴訟時間影響因子的分析結果與發現,綜合成一個全面性的企業專利策略,相信對於提升企業競爭力與遏阻競爭會有相當大的助益。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractInnovation can enhance the usefulness of products and services, but technological innovation may be hindered by many potential barriers. One potential barrier that becomes more and more important is patent infringement litigation. As patentees may deter anyone from making, offering to sell, selling, using, and importing without their licenses, patent right is a competitive weapon of business.
To this aim, we first investigate the relationship between patent features and patent litigations, identify potential patent risk factors, and propose a method to quantitatively evaluate patent infringement litigation risk. We find that certain factors do have significant impacts on the probability for a patent to be used in a litigation. By identifying these risk factors, we may manage product development strategies and patent application strategies to avoid being litigated by competitors. The difference between patents filed before and after the Leahy–Smith America Invents Act is also reported.
Internet-of-things (IoT) has become one of the most popular topics in recent years. Apart from technological issues, there are many other challenges involved in the business side of IoT product development. Patent infringement risk, for example, is one issue that cannot be ignored, and therefore it is imperative to develop an efficient and effective way of evaluating this type of risk. To understand the patent risk of the IoT industry, we use logistic regression to identify patent risk factors and quantify the risk of patent litigation by reviewing the relationship between patent features and patent litigations. Through identification of these patent risk factors, our study can help companies avoid patent litigations when developing IoT products.
In order to deter competitors from market, once a competitor infringe patent rights, a patentee may choose to sue infringer. A patent infringement litigation typically has long duration. For plaintiffs, defendants, and relevant third parties, as the longer the litigation time the higher the cost, one major issue is the time length of a lawsuit. To understand what factors may affect litigation time, we conduct regression analysis to identify several litigation factors that have impact on the length of a litigation. Our finding may help parties involved in a lawsuit better estimate the litigation time length and do strategic response.
This dissertation investigates the subjects about patent risk and litigation time and provides some interesting findings. Our findings may give some ideas for companies to establish patent strategies. Companies that establish better patent strategies may enhance the competitiveness.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T11:09:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
U0001-1404202112383900.pdf: 1658443 bytes, checksum: 9b47fd73f45dedd5b09b93627b18c04d (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2021
en
dc.description.tableofcontents誌謝 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iv
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1. Background 1
1.2. Motivation 5
1.3. Purpose 6
Chapter 2 Literature Review 8
2.1. Indicators-based patent value studies 9
2.2. Indicators-based patent risk studies 14
2.3. Text-based patent value studies 15
2.4. Text-based patent risk studies 17
2.5. Discussion 21
Chapter 3 Patent Risk Factors 24
3.1 Preamble 24
3.2 Hypotheses 24
3.3 Methodology 27
3.3.1 Data Description 28
3.3.2 Variables and Regression Analysis 28
3.4 Result of Regression 34
3.5 Summary 39
Chapter 4 Patent Risk in the IoT Industry 41
4.1 Preamble 41
4.2 Analyses 44
4.3 Methodology 44
4.3.1 Data Description 45
4.3.2 Variables and Regression Analysis 46
Chapter 5 Characteristics of Short Patent Litigation 59
5.1 Preamble 59
5.2 Hypotheses 62
5.3 Methodology 65
5.3.1 Data Description 65
5.3.2 Variables and Regression Analysis 66
5.3.3 Result of Regression 67
5.4 Summary 85
Chapter 6 Conclusion and Future Works 87
Bibliography 90
dc.language.isoen
dc.subject物聯網zh_TW
dc.subject專利風險zh_TW
dc.subject專利侵權zh_TW
dc.subject專利訴訟zh_TW
dc.subject訴訟時間長度zh_TW
dc.subjectlitigation time lengthen
dc.subjectPatent risken
dc.subjectPatent litigationen
dc.subjectPatent infringementen
dc.subjectIoTen
dc.subjectRisk Evaluationen
dc.title專利訴訟風險的實證研究zh_TW
dc.titleAn Empirical Study of Patent Litigation Risken
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear109-2
dc.description.degree博士
dc.contributor.author-orcid0000-0001-8975-1967
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee魏志平(Chih-Ping Wei),陳建錦(Chien-Chin Chen),余峻瑜(Jiun-Yu Yu),莊皓鈞(Hao-Chun Chuang),陳省三(Sheng-San Cheng)
dc.subject.keyword專利風險,專利訴訟,專利侵權,物聯網,訴訟時間長度,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordPatent risk,Patent litigation,Patent infringement,IoT,Risk Evaluation,litigation time length,en
dc.relation.page97
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU202100828
dc.rights.note有償授權
dc.date.accepted2021-04-16
dc.contributor.author-college管理學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept資訊管理學研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:資訊管理學系

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
U0001-1404202112383900.pdf
  未授權公開取用
1.62 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved