Author
Abstract
A so-called pro-patent policy has been globally adopted by an increasing number of countries since the 1980s and its use is spreading in Japan as well. However, the United States and European countries, who were the pioneers of the policy, have begun to reconsider it. Meanwhile, the paradigm of the era has changed dramatically with the sophistication of technology and networks such as Web2.0 and the development of open innovation. In this environment, should the pro-patent approach be regarded as the sole policy to be relied on in the same way as before? Should the policy be reviewed? If so, from what kind of perspective should it be reviewed? Contrary to the existing approach of apparently protecting every right for the sake of the word "pro-patent," this paper will examine the principle of intellectual property systems and look at the justification for their exclusiveness in an effort to identify areas for review. In doing so, we will add public (ethics and competition policies) and effective social system perspectives. In particular, in light of the paradigm changes described above, the purpose of the intellectual property systems-the purpose, at least, for Japan at present-is to encourage innovation. Therefore, this paper will focus on the viewpoint of market transactions based on the development of open innovation. (To state the conclusion in advance, this viewpoint will also raise new considerations about the justification of the exclusiveness.) This paper also presents several proposals for the revision of the patent system as specific examples of the proposed areas for revision. Meanwhile, any revision first requires an understanding of the current situation. In particular, because a large volume of analysis has been required for the former digital IT equipment industry in terms of the role of the patent system (although patents have a strong relationship with the digital IT equipment industry, the status of the Japanese digital IT equipment industry has unfortunately been deteriorating since the 1990s, primarily because developing countries have caught up in technological terms), the details are explained in the supplement at the end of the paper. (The conclusion about the importance of the patent system has not changed.)
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:eti:rpdpjp:08009. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.