IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/eme/rlwezz/s0193-589520150000027005.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Different Rules of Legal-Cost Allocation and Patent Holdup

In: Economic and Legal Issues in Competition, Intellectual Property, Bankruptcy, and the Cost of Raising Children

Author

Listed:
  • Elisabetta Ottoz
  • Franco Cugno

Abstract

Keywords: Legal costs, British system, American system, system favoring the defendant, patent holdup, K20, K21, O34

Suggested Citation

  • Elisabetta Ottoz & Franco Cugno, 2015. "Different Rules of Legal-Cost Allocation and Patent Holdup," Research in Law and Economics, in: Economic and Legal Issues in Competition, Intellectual Property, Bankruptcy, and the Cost of Raising Children, volume 27, pages 143-159, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:rlwezz:s0193-589520150000027005
    DOI: 10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005/full/epub?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec&title=10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/S0193-589520150000027005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Polinsky, A Mitchell & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1998. "Does the English Rule Discourage Low-Probability-of-Prevailing Plaintiffs?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(1), pages 141-157, January.
    2. Michael J. Meurer, 1989. "The Settlement of Patent Litigation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(1), pages 77-91, Spring.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 2008. "How Strong Are Weak Patents?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1347-1369, September.
    4. Llobet, Gerard, 2003. "Patent litigation when innovation is cumulative," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 1135-1157, October.
    5. Reiko Aoki & Jin‐Li Hu, 1999. "Licensing vs. Litigation: The Effect of the Legal System on Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 133-160, March.
    6. Vincenzo Denicolò & Damien Geradin & Anne Layne-Farrar & A. Jorge Padilla, 2008. "REVISITING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF: INTERPRETING eBAY IN HIGH-TECH INDUSTRIES WITH NON-PRACTICING PATENT HOLDERS," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 571-608.
    7. Hylton, Keith N, 1993. "Litigation Cost Allocation Rules and Compliance with the Negligence Standard," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 457-476, June.
    8. Hughes, James W & Snyder, Edward A, 1995. "Litigation and Settlement under the English and American Rules: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 225-250, April.
    9. Jennifer F. Reinganum & Louise L. Wilde, 1986. "Settlement, Litigation, and the Allocation of Litigation Costs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 557-566, Winter.
    10. Carl Shapiro, 2010. "Injunctions, Hold-Up, and Patent Royalties-super-1," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 12(2), pages 509-557.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bar, Talia & Kalinowski, Jesse, 2019. "Patent validity and the timing of settlements," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Jean Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1998. "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 223-246.
    3. Jeon, Haejun & Nishihara, Michi, 2018. "Optimal patent policy in the presence of vertical separation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(2), pages 682-697.
    4. Llobet, Gerard, 2003. "Patent litigation when innovation is cumulative," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 1135-1157, October.
    5. Jean O Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 2004. "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Literature," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000486, David K. Levine.
    6. Baptiste Massenot & Maria Maraki & Christian Thoeni, 2016. "Legal compliance and litigation spending under the English and American rule: Experimental evidence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 16.19, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    7. Ottoz Elisabetta & Cugno Franco, 2012. "Does Banning Side Payments in Patent Settlements Suffice to Fully Protect Consumers?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201201, University of Turin.
    8. Jeon, Haejun, 2015. "Patent infringement, litigation, and settlement," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-111.
    9. Gerard Llobet & Javier Suarez, 2005. "Financing and the Protection of Innovators," Working Papers wp2005_0502, CEMFI.
    10. Mark Schankerman & Florian Schuett, 2022. "Patent Screening, Innovation, and Welfare," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(4), pages 2101-2148.
    11. Haejun Jeon, 2016. "Patent litigation and cross licensing with cumulative innovation," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 119(3), pages 179-218, November.
    12. Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. Vries, 2005. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(505), pages 583-601, July.
    13. Anne Duchêne, 2017. "Patent Litigation Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 84(2), pages 631-660, June.
    14. Barrenechea, Martin, 2015. "Process innovations, patent litigation and time effects," MPRA Paper 65842, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2010. "Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 472-503, September.
    16. Bertrand Chopard & Thomas Cortade & Eric Langlais, 2013. "Damage rules and the patent hold-up problem : An analysis of Article L. 615-7," EconomiX Working Papers 2013-37, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    17. Buzzacchi, Luigi & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2008. "Patent litigation insurance and R&D incentives," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 272-286, December.
    18. Reiko Aoki & Jin-Li Hu, 1996. "Allocation of Legal Costs and Patent Litigation: A Cooperative Game Approach," Industrial Organization 9612001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Jeon, Haejun, 2019. "Patent protection and R&D subsidy under asymmetric information," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 332-354.
    20. Kou Zonglai & Zhang Jian, 2007. "Endogenous licensing in cumulative innovation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 2(3), pages 424-457, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:rlwezz:s0193-589520150000027005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.