IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sip/dpaper/11-014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fixing the Patent Office

Author

Listed:
  • Mark A. Lemley

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

How can we allow patent examiners to effectively distinguish between patentable and unpatentable inventions, without slowing the process to a crawl or wasting a bunch of money? This essay reviews the recent literature and considers a number of proposals and their limitations. It concludes that the system can be improved, but that we are unlikely to solve the problem of bad patents altogether. The focus in reform discussions should be on understanding and changing applicant and examiner incentives rather than simply spending money.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark A. Lemley, 2012. "Fixing the Patent Office," Discussion Papers 11-014, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:11-014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/repec/sip/11-014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lei, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2017. "Why weak patents? Testing the examiner ignorance hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 43-56.
    2. Arruñada, Benito & Hansen, Stephen, 2015. "Organizing public good provision: Lessons from Managerial Accounting," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 185-191.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K30 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sip:dpaper:11-014. 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: Anne Shor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cestaus.html .

    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.