ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk"
(abstract) |
(→Excerpts available online: ** ''See: The notice problem'') |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* Ch1: [http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8634.pdf Introduction: The Argument in Brief] | * Ch1: [http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8634.pdf Introduction: The Argument in Brief] | ||
* Ch3: [http://researchoninnovation.org/dopatentswork/dopat3.pdf If You Can’t Tell the Boundaries, Then It Ain’t Property] | * Ch3: [http://researchoninnovation.org/dopatentswork/dopat3.pdf If You Can’t Tell the Boundaries, Then It Ain’t Property] | ||
| + | ** ''See: [[The notice problem]]'' | ||
* Ch9: [http://researchoninnovation.org/dopatentswork/dopat9.pdf Abstract Patents and Software] | * Ch9: [http://researchoninnovation.org/dopatentswork/dopat9.pdf Abstract Patents and Software] | ||
Revision as of 21:19, 26 April 2011
Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk was written by James Bessen and Michael Meurer, and published by Princeton University Press, 2008.
Discusses the inherent risks in granting abstract patents such as software patents and claims that, in the USA, the economic benefits of most patents ceased in the mid 1990s.
Excerpts available online
- Ch1: Introduction: The Argument in Brief
- Ch3: If You Can’t Tell the Boundaries, Then It Ain’t Property
- See: The notice problem
- Ch9: Abstract Patents and Software
(source: http://researchoninnovation.org/dopatentswork/ )
