My bibliography
Save this item
Preliminary Injunctive Relief: Theory and Evidence from Patent Litigation
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Bronwyn H. Hall and Marie Ham., 1999.
"The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94,"
Economics Working Papers
E99-268, University of California at Berkeley.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Rose Marie Ham, 2000. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Development and Comp Systems 9912001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Rose Marie Ham, 1999. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," NBER Working Papers 7062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham, Rose Marie, 1999. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2nk0w2hz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 1999. "Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt1rg1088v, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 1999. "Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rg1088v, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2000.
"Damages and injunctions in protecting proprietary research tools,"
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
177, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2000. "Damages and Injunctions in Protecting Proprietary Research Tools," CEPR Discussion Papers 2554, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2000. "Damages and Injunctions in Protecting Proprietary Research Tools," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt3c04n348, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Mark Schankerman & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2001. "Damages and Injunctions in Protecting Proprietary Research Tools," Law and Economics 0012002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Mark Schankerman and Suzanne Scotchmer., 2000. "Damages and Injunctions in Protecting Proprietary Research Tools," Economics Working Papers E00-288, University of California at Berkeley.
- 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.
- Reiko Aoki & Jin-Li Hu, 1996. "Licensing vs. Litigation: Effect of the Legal System on Incentives to Innovate," Industrial Organization 9612002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2007.
"The Value of Intellectual Property Rights to Firms,"
Economics Series Working Papers
319, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2007. "The Value of Intellectual Property Rights to Firms," Discussion Papers 06-036, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
- Louise Keely, 2001.
"Using Patents In Growth Models,"
Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 449-492.
- Keely,L.C., 2000. "Using patents in growth models," Working papers 30, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Emmanuel Combe & Etienne Pfister, 2000. "Patents against imitators: an empirical investigation on French data," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla00001, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
- Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1998.
"Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?,"
Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 247-304, June.
- Samuel Kortum & Josh Lerner, 1997. "Stronger Protection or Technological Revolution: What is Behind the Recent Surge in Patenting?," NBER Working Papers 6204, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Graham, Stuart J. H. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2002.
"Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-Examinations and European Patent Oppositions,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt2qt097bd, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Stuart J. H. Graham & Bronwyn H. Hall & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2003. "Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions," Industrial Organization 0303009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Graham, Stuart J.H. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2002. "Post-Issue Patent “Quality Control:” A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7931q79x, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Graham, Stuart J. H. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2002. "Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt8bs830w9, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Stuart J. H. Graham & Bronwyn H. Hall & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2002. "Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions," NBER Working Papers 8807, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Graham, Stuart J.H. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2002. "Post-Issue Patent “Quality Control:” A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt7931q79x, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Argyres, Nicholas S. & Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 2002. "Governance inseparability and the evolution of US biotechnology industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 197-219, February.
- Francisco Ramos Romeu, 2010. "An economic theory of the regulation of preliminary measures," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 267-300, December.
- 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.
- Jean O. Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1997. "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," NBER Working Papers 6296, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Christine Greenhalgh & Padraig Dixon, 2002.
"The Economics of Intellectual Property: A Review to Identify Themes for Future Research,"
Economics Series Working Papers
135, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Padraig Dixon & Christine Greenhalgh, 2003. "The Economics of Intellectual Property: A Review to Identify Themes for Future Research," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000645, David K. Levine.
- Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1997.
"Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership,"
NBER Working Papers
6297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jean Olson Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1998. "Stylised Fact of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 20, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
- Kim, Yee Kyoung & Lee, Keun & Park, Walter G. & Choo, Kineung, 2012. "Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 358-375.
- Scotchmer, Suzanne & Schankerman, Mark, 1999.
"Damages and Injunctions in the Protection of Proprietary Research Tools,"
Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series
qt0dh221jq, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
- Mark Schankerman & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1999. "Damages and Injunctions in the Protection of Proprietary Research Tools," NBER Working Papers 7086, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Choi, Jay Pil, 1998.
"Patent Litigation as an Information-Transmission Mechanism,"
American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1249-1263, December.
- Choi, J.P., 1997. "Patent Litigation as an Information Transmission Mechanism," Discussion Paper 1997-17, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Llobet, Gerard, 2003.
"Patent litigation when innovation is cumulative,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 1135-1157, October.
- Gerard Llobet, 2001. "Patent Litigation When Innovation Is Cumulative," Working Papers wp2001_0102, CEMFI.
- Choi, J.P., 1997. "Patent Litigation as an Information Transmission Mechanism," Other publications TiSEM a9afa43f-baa3-4e40-b599-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Wang, Jun, 2023. "Motivations for the restructuring of China’s patent court system," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
- Emmanuel Combe & Etienne Pfister, 2000. "Patents against imitators: an empirical investigation on French data," Post-Print halshs-03724865, HAL.
- Diestre, Luis & Lumineau, Fabrice & Durand, Rodolphe, 2023. "Litigate or let it go? Multi-market contact and IP infringement-litigation dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
- Lanjouw, Jenny & Schankerman, Mark, 1998. "Patent Suits: Do They Distort Research Incentives?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2042, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Emmanuel Combe & Etienne Pfister, 2000. "Patents against imitators: an empirical investigation on French data," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-03724865, HAL.
- Bronwyn Hall & Rosemaire Ham Ziedonis, 2000. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1979-95," Economics Series Working Papers 2000-W16, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Keun Lee & Yee Kyoung Kim, 2014. "Patents versus utility models in a dynamic change of an economy: Korea," Chapters, in: Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), Intellectual Property for Economic Development, chapter 4, pages 90-119, Edward Elgar Publishing.
- 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.
- Rasmus Arler Bogetoft & Peter Bogetoft, 2022. "Market entrance, patents, and preliminary injunctions: a model of pharmaceutical patent litigation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 379-423, June.
- AndreÌ s LoÌ pez & Eugenia Orlicki, 2009. "Who Uses the Patent System in Developing Countries? A Study of Patent Propensities in Argentina, 1992-2001," Microeconomics Working Papers 22785, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
- John R. Boyce & Aidan Hollis, 2007. "Preliminary Injunctions and Damage Rules in Patent Law," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 385-405, June.