Veranstaltungen

Post-grant validity challenges at patent offices rely on the private initiative of third parties to correct mistakes made by patent offices. We hypothesize that incentives to bring post-grant validity challenges are reduced when many firms benefit from revocation of a patent and when firms are caught up in patent thickets. Using data on opposition against patents at the European Patent Office we show that opposition decreases in fields in which many others profit from patent revocations. Moreover, in fields with a large number of mutually blocking patents the incidence of opposition is sharply reduced, particularly among large firms and firms that are caught up directly in patent thickets. These findings indicate that post-grant patent review may not constitute an effective correction device for erroneous patent grants in technologies affected by either patent thickets or highly dispersed patent ownership.

Recent research on the economics of patents is surveyed. The topics covered include theoretical and empirical evidence on patents as incentives for innovation, the effectiveness of patents for invention disclosure, patent valuation, and the design of patent systems. We also look at some current policy areas, including software and business method patents, university patenting, and the growth in patent litigation.

Seit Jahren steigt die Zahl der Patentanmeldungen weltweit dramatisch an. Wie reagieren die großen Patentämter weltweit auf diese höhere Belastung? Ist es überhaupt noch möglich, den exponentiell zunehmenden Stand der Technik verlässlich zu recherchieren und zu berücksichtigen? Welche Modelle der Nutzung oder Anerkennung von Arbeitsergebnissen sind in der Diskussion? Welche technischen Lösungen sind denkbar? Gibt es erfolgversprechende Anstöße und Konzepte zur Harmonisierung der Verfahren und Rechtsgrundlagen? Aus der Perspektive des Deutschen Patent- und Markenamts – des größten nationalen Patentamts in Europa – werden die gegenwärtigen Tendenzen und Initiativen im internationalen Zusammenspiel der Ämter beleuchtet, Chancen und Hindernisse thematisiert und Lösungsansätze zur Diskussion gestellt.

Cornelia Rudloff-Schäffer ist seit 1. Januar 2009 Präsidentin des Deutschen Patent- und Markenamts (DPMA) in München. Sie lernte den gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und das Urheberrecht von 1984 bis 1991 am damaligen Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Patent-, Urheber und Wettbewerbsrecht und am Institut für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität als Wissenschaftliche Angestellte kennen und schätzen. Als Referentin im Bundesministerium der Justiz war sie ab Oktober 1991 in den Referaten eingesetzt, die für die Vorbereitung nationaler Gesetzgebung und für europäische und internationale Vorhaben im Bereich des Patent-, Gebrauchsmuster-, Marken- und Geschmacksmusterrechts zuständig sind. Zwischen 1996 und 1998 folgte ein Exkurs als Referatsleiterin für Rechtsfragen der neuen Technologien in den Naturwissenschaften und der Bioethik, bevor sie als Referatsleiterin ins Marken- und Wettbewerbsrecht wechselte. 2001 kehrte Frau Rudloff-Schäffer von Berlin nach München zurück und übernahm im DPMA die Leitung zunächst der Rechtsabteilung, dann der Hauptabteilung 3 (Marken und Muster). Sie ist Mitglied im Kuratorium des MPI für Immaterialgüter- und Wettbewerbsrecht, das das Institut zu wissenschaftspolitischen, wirtschaftlichen und organisationstechnischen Fragen berät.

We use a rich longitudinal dataset on department-level productivity in a contemporary field of science to identify and decompose the causal impact of hiring a star on local knowledge production. Specifically, we estimate the relative roles of knowledge spillovers versus recruiting externalities as they affect co-located researchers who are related or unrelated to the star in idea space. Hiring a star does not increase overall incumbent productivity, but this aggregate effect hides off setting effects on colleagues who are related (positive) versus unrelated (negative). Star hires improve subsequent joiner quality for both related and unrelated scientists, although the effect is significantly larger for related scientists. The overall positive impact of the star on department-level productivity is mainly due to joiner-quality effects. Furthermore, the productivity impact is more pronounced at mid- and lower-ranked institutions, suggesting implications for the optimal spatial organization of science and university strategies aimed at ascending departmental rankings.

This paper describes the “USPTO Trademark Case Files Dataset” (dataset) a new dataset of trademark applications and registrations derived from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) main database for administering trademark case files. The USPTO is releasing these data for the first time in a form convenient for public use and academic research, consistent with the agency’s responsibility to make patent and trademark information available to the public. The dataset provides detailed information on 6.7 million trademark applications filed with or registrations issued by the USPTO between January 1870 and January 2012, including ownership, mark characteristics, classification, prosecution events, and renewal history. This paper provides a comprehensive description of the dataset, including discussions of the legal framework affecting and the administrative processes generating these data. We provide a “first look” at the information the dataset captures and present key trends in trademark applications, registrations, and renewals. We highlight data elements valuable to researchers and the general public, and discuss issues that may arise in using these data. In releasing these data, we aim to encourage new streams of research on trademarks and what they indicate about their users, the strategies for employing them, and the wider economic impacts that these data will help uncover.

The Munich Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research (MCIER) at the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law cordially invites you to the seminar of Professor Marie Thursby, Ph.D. and Professor Jerry Thursby, Ph.D. (Georgia Institute of Technology, Scheller College of Business, University of Atlanta).

All over the world, Green Tech is considered to be an important element of today’s energy and climate policy. At the same time, patents are a key element for the promotion of inventive activity. At first sight, this makes it more than plausible to simply combine the two and use the patent system in order to foster Green Tech. - But are more and easier-to-get Green-Tech-Patents really the silver bullet for solving the problems that energy and climate policy is facing today? This talk is designed to scrutinize the tempting thought that patent system could play a leading role in this context. Questions that need to be addressed are the role of environmental challenges for mankind, the problem of defining what should be promoted as Green Tech, whether its fostering should be achieved by means of patent law rather than administrative law, what positions the world’s big patent offices are taking and what tools they can apply, and, last but not least, how Third World countries should be able to access Green Tech that for the most part is being produced in what one might call the First World. 

Professor Christoph Ann holds the chair for Corporate and IP Law at Technische Universität Mu¨nchen (TUM), School of Management. Before coming to Munich, he taught IP law from 2000-2003 as a full Professor of Law in Freiburg/Br. From 2001-2003 he also served as a “professorial judge” on the Mannheim District Court’s renowned IP infringement panel (7. Zivilkammer). In Munich, Prof. Ann teaches IP Law and serves on the Managing Board of the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center. He regularly teaches at law schools abroad: in the U.S. (UW Law’s CASRIP, Duke, Stetson, UOregon), Australia (La Trobe), France (IHEE, Strasbourg), and Hungary (Andrássy University). Prof. Ann has published five books and more than 130 articles and his interests focus on European and International Technology Protection (Patents & Trade Secrets) including Licensing, Competition Law, and the respective business contexts.