請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/73495完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 鄭秀玲(Show-Ling Jang) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ting-Yu Chou | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 周庭宇 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T07:38:12Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-03-27 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2019-03-27 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2019-03-20 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., Moore, K. A., Trunkey, R. D. (2004). Valuable patents. Georgetown Law Journal, 92(3), 435-478.
Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., Walker, J. (2009). Extreme value or trolls on top? The characteristics of the most-litigated patents. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 158(1), 1-37. Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., Walker, J. (2010). Patent quality and settlement among repeat patent litigants. Georgetown Law Journal, 99(3), 677-712. Bessen, J., Meurer, M. J., Ford, J. L. (2012). The private and social costs of patent trolls. Regulation, 34(4), 26-35. Bessen, J., Meurer, M. J. (2014). The direct costs from NPE disputes. Cornell Law Review, 99(2), 387-424. Cohen, L., Gurun, U. G., Kominers, S. D., (2015). Patent trolls: Evidence from targeted firms. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper 15-002, Harvard Business School. Cotropia, C. A., Kesan, J. P., Schwartz, D. L. (2014). Unpacking patent assertion entities (PAEs). Minnesota Law Review, 99(2), 649-703. Cotropia, C. A., Kesan, J. P., Schwartz, D. L. (2018). Heterogeneity among patent plaintiffs: An empirical analysis of patent case progression, settlement, and adjudication. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 15(1), 80-125. Firth, D. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80(1), 27-38. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. Heinze, G., Schemper, M. (2002). A solution to the problem of separation in logistic regression. Statistic in Medicine, 21(16), 2409-2419. King, G., Zeng, L. (2001). Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Analysis, 9(2), 137-163. Lanjouw, J. O., Schankerman, M. (2010). Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. The RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 129-151. Leitgöb, H. (2013). The problem of modeling rare events in ML-based logistic regression - Assessing potential remedies via MC simulations. Presentation at the 2013 European Survey Research Association, Ljubljana. Marco, A. C., Tesfayesus, A., Toole, A. A. (2017). Patent litigation data from US district court electronic records (1963-2015). USPTO Economic Working Paper No. 2017-06. United States Patent and Trademark Office. Miller, S. P. (2013). What’s the connection between repeat litigation and patent quality? A (partial) defense of the most litigated patents. Stanford Technology Law Review, 16(2), 229-348. Miller, S. P., Aravind, A., Bengfort, B., Clarisse De La Cerda, Dragoni, M., Gibson, K., Itai, A., Johnson, C., Kannappan, D., Kehoe, E., Kim, H., Mladinich, K., Pinho, R., Polansky, J., Weissenberg, B. (2018). Who’s suing us? Decoding patent plaintiffs since 2000 with the stanford npe litigation dataset. Stanford Technology Law Review, 21(2), 235-275. Penin, J. (2012). Strategic uses of patents in markets for technology: A story of fabless firms, brokers and trolls. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 84, 633-641. Shrestha, S. K. (2010). Trolls or market-makers? An empirical analysis of nonpracticing entities. Columbia Law Review, 110(1), 114-160. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/73495 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 非實施專利實體(Non-Practicing Entities, NPEs)握有大量專利卻不從事生產行為,他們大量興訟,為被告廠商帶來高額的訴訟成本,再透過和解來向被告索取賠償或是權利金。過去文獻發現NPEs的和解率並沒有顯著高於PEs(Practicing Entities),然而該發現卻未控制NPEs的類型,也未同時考慮系爭專利品質對其訴訟和解的影響。因此,本文蒐集2010年美國2,456筆NPEs和PEs為原告的專利訴訟資料,進一步將原告進行分類,在控制訴訟案的主審法官與原告律師等固定效果下,採用Firth Logistic Regression量化迴歸模型,探討原告類型和系爭專利的品質良窳,如訴訟案MLPs(Most litigated patents)比例和系爭專利範圍數等對其訴訟和解率的影響。實證結果發現:(1)僅在研發導向的大學與前新創公司(NPEs)發起的訴訟案之中,系爭專利的品質提升時對和解率有正向影響。 (2)對於大部分原告專利所有人(PEs和NPEs)而言,MLPs佔訴訟案系爭專利的比例越高,和解率越低,不過在個別發明者與專利授權公司發起的訴訟案中,卻呈現相反的趨勢。此乃證明NPEs類型和專利品質對於訴訟和解率有不同影響。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Non-practicing entities (NPEs) are often regarded as notorious characters in the intellectual property. They assert patent infringement, bringing massive cost of lawsuits for defendant firms, but end up seeking the nuisance value settlement. Previous studies found that the settlement rate of NPEs wasn’t significantly higher than PEs; however, they haven’t had constructed a comprehensive empirical model to consider in the effects of NPEs types, nor the quality of asserted patents on the settlement rates. In this article, we collected 2,456 patent infringement suits, asserted by either PEs or NPEs, during 2010 and used Firth Logistic Regression model to examine the impact of NPEs types and patent quality, such like MLPs (Most-litigated Patents) rate and number of claims, on the settlement rate, while controlling the fixed effect of judge, plaintiff’s attorney and other conditions. Our result indicates that: (1) Only among the infringement suits asserted by University and Failed Operating Company (both are R&D oriented NPEs), the patent quality is positively correlated with settlement rate. (2) To most of PEs and NPEs, the higher proportion of MLPs within all the asserted patents in one case, the lower settlement rate it may be. However, among the suits by Individual Inventor and Patent Holding Company, the proportion of MLPs ratio within asserted patents is negatively correlated with the settlement rate. It shows that the type of NPEs and the quality of asserted patents do affect the settlement rate of patent infringement lawsuits in different ways. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T07:38:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R05323003-1.pdf: 1260875 bytes, checksum: 1e0a0400c432614869115b49a290d547 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 一、 前言 1
二、 文獻回顧 3 (一) 訴訟原告NPEs之分類 3 (二) 系爭專利品質對專利訴訟和解的影響 5 三、 美國2010年專利訴訟資料 7 (一) 訴訟資料與NPEs類型 7 (二) 專利品質資料 10 四、 計量模型與變數設定 12 五、 實證結果 16 (一) 敘述統計 16 (二) 迴歸結果 22 六、 結論 28 七、 參考文獻 29 八、 附錄 31 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 非實施專利實體 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 專利蟑螂 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 專利訴訟 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 專利品質 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | non-practicing entity (NPE) | en |
| dc.subject | patent troll | en |
| dc.subject | patent litigation | en |
| dc.subject | patent quality | en |
| dc.subject | most-litigated patent | en |
| dc.title | 專利品質與訴訟結果之研究:以美國 NPEs 為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Patent Quality and Litigation Settlement: The case of NPEs in the US. | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林惠玲(Hui-Lin Lin),楊志海(Chih-Hai Yang) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 非實施專利實體,專利蟑螂,專利訴訟,專利品質, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | non-practicing entity (NPE),patent troll,patent litigation,patent quality,most-litigated patent, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 33 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201900657 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2019-03-21 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 經濟學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 經濟學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-108-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.23 MB | Adobe PDF |
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。
