Patent Trolls: Evidence from Targeted Firms

Lauren Cohen,Umit G. Gurun,Scott Duke Kominers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3147

IF: 5.4

2019-09-03

Management Science

Abstract:We provide the first large-sample evidence on the behavior and impact of nonpracticing entities (NPEs) in the intellectual property space. We find that, on average, NPEs appear to behave as opportu...

management,operations research & management science

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Empirical Evidence on the Behavior and Impact of Patent Trolls: A Survey

Lauren Cohen,Umit Gurun,Scott Duke Kominers,Umit G. Gurun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2708224

2015-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:We survey the empirical literature on non-practicing entity (NPE) litigation behavior and its consequences. We document both aggregate trends and cross-sectional differences amongst various types of NPEs. Survey evidence illustrates a number of ways in which NPEs can potentially act opportunistically, and indicates at least some instances and consequences of observed NPE opportunism. Large-sample empirical work has recently begun corroborating and amplifying the findings from survey evidence. NPEs on average behave as "patent trolls." Indeed, NPEs hold and frequently litigate patents that are likely to be at least partially invalidated; moreover, NPEs, target cash irrespective of its relation to alleged infringement. Cash-targeting is neither the main driver of practicing entity (PE) intellectual property (IP) litigation, nor of non-IP litigation against publicly traded firms. The empirical evidence suggests, however, that not all NPEs exhibit trolling behavior -- the cash-targeting observed in the data is primarily the behavior of large patent aggregators, rather than small inventors. NPE patent trolling has a real negative impact on targeted firms, without any increase in innovation, technology transfer, or other counterbalancing benefits measured thus far.

English Else
Chilling effects of patent trolls

Feng Chen,Yu Hou,Jiaping Qiu,Gordon Richardson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104702

IF: 7.2

2022-12-22

Research Policy

Abstract:We find that non-practicing entities (NPEs) exhibit a unique legal strategy of sequential rounds: (1) subject to the same patent, NPE plaintiffs file approximately seven follow-on lawsuits after the initial lawsuit; and (2) when a firm is sued by NPEs, the likelihood of its technology peers being sued increases by 14 % in the subsequent year. Defendants' technology peers experience significant market value losses around the lawsuit filing date. Moreover, defendants' technology peers respond to NPE litigation risk by increasing R&D investments to develop workaround technologies. However, the increase in R&D incrementally generates fewer patent citations or patents with lower values. Thus, our results highlight broader wealth effects and corresponding real effects of NPE-initiated litigation on defendants' technology peers. These results provide sharp contrasts to the insignificant wealth and real impacts on defendants' technology peers if litigations are initiated by practicing entities (PEs). The new evidence informs the current regulatory and policy debates pertaining to NPEs.

multidisciplinary sciences
Escaping the patent trolls: The impact of non‐practicing entity litigation on firm innovation strategies

Kenneth G. Huang,Mei‐Xuan Li,Carl Hsin‐Han Shen,Yanzhi Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3606

IF: 8.3

2024-04-21

Strategic Management Journal

Abstract:Research Summary Non‐practicing entities (NPEs) are firms that accumulate and acquire patents but do not further develop or implement the patented inventions (known as patent trolling). NPEs seek to receive royalties or profits through out‐of‐court settlements in patent infringement cases. We examine how firms targeted by NPEs in NPE‐initiated litigations (i.e., target firms) shift their innovation strategies and trajectories in response to heightened litigation risks. We theorize and show that after the initial lawsuit, target firms draw more upon their in‐house technologies to reduce the legal ground for further lawsuits. Furthermore, nontarget firms in related technology areas shift their innovation activities away from those of target firms under high NPE litigation risks. These effects are more pronounced with higher innovation costs and under more competitive product markets. Managerial Summary Non‐practicing entities (NPEs) are known as patent trolls that accumulate and acquire patents but do not further develop or implement these patented inventions. These patent trolls aim to obtain royalties or profits through out‐of‐court settlements in patent infringement cases. We investigate how firms targeted by patent trolls in litigations (i.e., target firms) change their innovation strategies and trajectories to deal with increased NPE litigation risks. After the initial lawsuit, we find that these target firms use their in‐house technologies more to reduce the legal ground for future lawsuits. Moreover, nontarget firms in related technology areas move their innovation activities away from those of target firms under high litigation risks. These effects are stronger when innovation costs are higher and under more competitive product markets.

management,business
Spillover Effects of Patent Litigation Initiated by Non-Practicing Entities: Evidence from the Capital Market

Feng Chen,Yu Hou,Gordon Richardson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3492471

2019-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:We analyze the potential spillover effects from patent-infringement litigation initiated by non-practicing entities (NPEs). When a firm is sued by NPEs, its at-risk technology peers also experience significant market value losses around the litigation filing date, losses that are much greater than those around patent litigations initiated by practicing entities. We also show that state anti-troll laws mitigate the spillover effects. Technology peers that are not subsequently sued by NPEs experience negative operational impacts, including a decline in R&D innovation efficiency following NPE litigations. Overall, our evidence suggests that there are more big losers from NPE litigation than what has been identified in the existing NPE litigation literature.
Do Patent-Trolls Cause the High-Tech Firms to Delist?

Sayla Sowat Siddiqui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3905461

2021-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:This paper investigates the impact of non-practicing entity (NPE) patent litigation on the delisting of the firms in the U.S. stock market. Using a sample of high-tech and patent intensive firms from the U.S. market between 2000 and 2019, we find that the frivolous patent trolling by the NPEs is positively associated with the delisting decision of the defendant firms. This result is more pronounced when the firms are small, young, under distress and experience negative sentiment in the market. We ensure the causality of this relationship by using the Anti-troll law and American Invents Act targeted to curb the threat of NPE trolls. We also find that this effect is influenced by the cost of NPE litigation and that going private can significantly mitigate the threat of NPE trolls. Our result recommends that policies aimed to ease the threat of the NPE patent trolls is important to safeguard the steadiness of the innovation intensive companies in the U.S. stock market.

English Else
DIMINISHING THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF TROLLING: THE IMPACTS OF RECENT JUDICIAL ACTIVITY ON NON-PRACTICING ENTITIES

Holly Forsberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/tlp.2012.94

2012-04-13

Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law and Policy

Abstract:The United States patent system has increasingly been faced with complications presented by a type of non-practicing entity known as ̳patent trolls‘—patent owner entities that do not actively innovate, develop or manufacture patented material but instead seek to profit from patent ownership through licensing agreements and litigation. This article explores arguments on both sides of the non-practicing entity debate and evaluates perceptions of this activity as both an accessible secondary commodities market and a litigation-based business model.

English Else
Who Feeds the Trolls? Patent Trolls and the Patent Examination Process

Josh Feng,Xavier Jaravel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2838017

2016-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:We show that examiner-driven variation in patent rights leads to quantitatively large impacts on several patent outcomes, including patent value, citations, and litigation. Notably, Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs) overwhelmingly purchase patents granted by "lenient" examiners. These examiners issue patents that are more likely to be litigated by both PAEs and conventional companies, and that also have higher invalidity rates. PAEs leverage a specific friction in the patent system, which stems from lenient examiners and affects litigation more broadly. These patterns indicate that there is much at stake during patent examination, contradicting the influential "rational ignorance" view of the patent office.

English Else
Do Standard-Essential Patent Owners Behave Opportunistically? Evidence From U.S. District Court Dockets

Brian J Love,Yassine Lefouili,Christian Helmers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahad010

2024-01-17

American Law and Economics Review

Abstract:Abstract To what extent and with what effect do owners of standard-essential patents (SEPs) “hold-up” companies that produce standard-compliant products? To explore this question, we construct measures of opportunistic patent licensing behaviors using detailed information collected from the dockets of U.S. patent cases filed (2010–2019) to enforce SEPs and a matched sample of non-SEPs. Overall, we find evidence of at least one opportunistic behavior by the patent enforcer in approximately 77% of SEP and 65% of non-SEP assertions in court. However, these figures mask important heterogeneity across types of conduct. There is significantly more opportunistic conduct that tends to increase a potential licensee’s loss if the patent enforcer prevails in court: 35% of SEP assertions versus 10% of non-SEP assertions. In contrast, conduct that tends to increase a potential licensee’s litigation costs is less common, and the difference between SEP assertions (8%) and non-SEP assertions (6%) is small. We also show that opportunistic behavior is associated with case settlement, with the direction and strength of the correlation depending on the type of opportunistic behavior. Behavior that increases a potential licensee’s litigation costs is associated with an increase in the probability of settlement, while behavior that increases a potential licensee’s loss if the patent enforcer prevails in court is negatively associated with settlement.

economics,law
How do patent trolls affect the technological innovation of Chinese enterprises? Evidence from enterprise patent survey data in China

Zhifeng Yin,Jian Guo,Zhen Sun,Mindan Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2022.101695

IF: 4.489

2022-07-01

Journal of Engineering and Technology Management

Abstract:Based on the 2017 China Patent Survey data, this study examines how contact with patent trolls affects Chinese enterprises’ technological innovation. The results indicate that the presence of patent trolls in the market may be beneficial for stimulating Chinese enterprises’ awareness of intellectual property rights and improving their technological innovation, indicated by increased R&D investment and patent quantity. However, direct contact with patent trolls does not improve patent value. Such contact further negatively affects patent implementation, as demonstrated by a decreasing share of self-implemented patents and an increasing share of licensed patents. Our findings reveal a “patent troll infection” among enterprises, which hinders patented technology implementation.

management,business,engineering, industrial
Patent Enforcement: A Comparative Review Preventing Patent Trolling in Europe

Benjamin FRANCO,Cristian BANACU,,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35219/mms.2018.3.09

2018-09-15

Abstract:The US has made significant progress in the patent legislation landscape as evidenced by the US Patent Act in the Constitution and America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011. Nevertheless, patent suits by non-practicing entities (NPEs) have been on the increase over the past ten years. Major corporations, especially, such as Apple and Samsung have been on the receiving end of the litigation as NPEs target their large cash holdings. A closer look at the patent laws in the US and Europe reveals subtle differences in the grace period, publication of patent, and the application of patent rights across member states. Given the preceding facts, vital action points for the European market include the enactment of laws that prevent patent trolls as opposed to punishing NPEs after the act and reduction of litigation costs for lowquality patents.

English Else
The growing problem of patent trolling

Lauren Cohen,Umit G Gurun,Scott Duke Kominers,Umit G. Gurun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad2686

IF: 56.9

2016-04-29

Science

Abstract:Cash-hungry patent trolls are squelching innovation—and should be screened out

multidisciplinary sciences
Strategic uses of patents in markets for technology: A story of fabless firms, brokers and trolls

Julien Pénin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.09.007

2012-11-01

Abstract:This paper analyses the strategic uses of patents in markets for technology. In particular, we study the behaviors of technological firms, patent brokers and patent trolls and explore their consequences on the amount of R&D investments of the economy. We show that patent brokers, in their pure form, are R&D increasing (i.e. they increase the R&D investments of both supplier and manufacturing firms) while patent trolls, in their pure form, are R&D decreasing. We also show that, paradoxically, an optimal positive level of trolling may exist if the probability to secure market transactions and the probability to encounter trolls are positively correlated. Then we discuss the normative implications of this research. Among others, we argue that changes in patent laws are needed in order to limit the possibility of trolling; however, the difficulty is that those changes might also affect the development of technological firms and brokers. Several possible evolutions of international patent laws are hence discussed.

economics
Patent Trolls and Schumpeter's Creative Destruction

Karol Śledzik,Karol ledzik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2424943

2014-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:There is no doubt that intellectual property should be protected because it is particularly vulnerable to "stealing". However, under the law for some time this "protection" is used to make profit by "Not Practicing Entities" - (the NPE's) also called Patent Trolls. Activity of Patent Trolls companies can significantly contribute to inhibit the diffusion process in the knowledge based economy. As Schumpeter recognized the concept of dynamic capitalism was doomed to fail, because the increased efficiency of the capitalist enterprise would lead to monopolistic structures and loss of the idea of entrepreneurship. Today we may risk statement that over-regulation in the field of patent protection in conjunction with the unfair practices of companies Patent Trolls may lead to stop the development of Knowledge Based Economy. The purpose of this article is to describe the abuse of intellectual property rights protection for companies that are "Non-Practicing Entities" (Patent Trolls) in the light of J.A. Schumpeter’s creative destruction concept.
What do Firms Gain from Patenting? The Case of the Global ICT Industry

Dimitrios Exadaktylos,Mahdi Ghodsi,Armando Rungi

2024-07-20

Abstract:This study investigates the causal relationship between patent grants and firms' dynamics in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industry, as the latter is a peculiar sector of modern economies, often under the lens of antitrust authorities. For our purpose, we exploit matched information about financial accounts and patenting activity in 2009-2017 by 179,660 companies operating in 39 countries. Preliminarily, we show how bigger companies are less than 2% of the sample, although they concentrate about 89% of the grants obtained in the period of analyses. Thus, we test that patent grants in the ICT industry have a significant and large impact on market shares and firm size of smaller companies (31.5% and 30.7%, respectively) in the first year after the grants, while we have no evidence of an impact for bigger companies. After a novel instrumental variable strategy that exploits information at the level of patent offices, we confirm that most of the effects on smaller companies are due to the protection of property rights and not to the innovative content of inventions. Finally, we never observe a significant impact on either profitability or productivity for any firm size category. Eventually, we discuss how our findings support the idea that the ICT industry is a case of endogenous R&D sunk costs, which prevent profit margins from rising in the presence of a relatively high market concentration.

General Economics
Patent Hold-out and Licensing Frictions: Evidence from Litigation of Standard Essential Patents

Brian J. Love,Christian Helmers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2023.102978

IF: 1.739

2023-06-14

International Journal of Industrial Organization

Abstract:The theory of patent "hold-out" posits that frictions in the market for licensing standard-essential patents (SEPs) provide incentives for prospective licensees to opportunistically delay taking licenses with the goal of avoiding or reducing royalty payments. We construct measures of pre- and in-litigation hold-out from information disclosed in U.S. cases filed 2010-2019. Relying on both SEP and a matched control set of non-SEP disputes, we explore whether frictions in the market for licensing are associated with hold-out. We find some evidence of an association between hold-out and both SEP portfolio size and enforcement uncertainty; however, we find no evidence associating pre- or in-litigation hold-out with the international breadth of SEP rights.

economics
A Primer Discussion on NPEs: From the Points of Antitrust Challenges

Binqiang Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2386156

2014-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:NPEs (Non Practicing Entities) and their patent trading deals are relatively new phenomena. Antitrust cases involving NPEs and related patent deals from EU and US set clear statement that NPEs and their patent trading behavior do fall under antitrust scrutiny. Due to the complexity and hard-to-trace nature of NPEs as well as the difficulty to define the effects brought to competition in related markets by NPEs' patent trading practice, antitrust investigation authorities face great challenges when dealing with NPEs. Innovative application is needed while current regulations and antitrust related laws are to be applied. Potential acts include a clear and extended definition of entities to be investigated, a combined ex-ante and ex-post investigation mechanism, and a platform established to provide extensive information related to patents and NPEs so that the information asymmetry problem can be mitigated.
Profiting from technological innovation by others: The effect of competitor patenting on firm value

Anita M. McGahan,Brian S. Silverman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.006

IF: 7.2

2006-10-01

Research Policy

Abstract:In 1986, Teece proposed a seminal framework for analyzing why innovators may fail to benefit from their innovations. He argued, in part, that firms with the requisite complementary assets can often expropriate an innovator's returns especially when appropriability regimes are weak. In this paper, we explore the implications of this framework from the perspective of an incumbent firm—more precisely, of investors in that firm—facing innovation by established corporate rivals and by inventors from outside its industry. We demonstrate that the financial-market value of publicly traded firms depends on patented innovation by competitors (both established rivals and industry outsiders). Our empirical study generates three main results. First, the financial-market value of an incumbent is negatively associated with “important” patenting by outside inventors. Second, in industries characterized by weak appropriability regimes or by a strong reliance on complementary assets, this relationship is reversed: important patenting by outsiders is positively associated with the incumbent's financial-market value. Third, the effect of outsiders’ patented innovation on the focal incumbent is qualitatively different than that of established rivals’ patented innovation on the incumbent. These results are consistent with implications of Teece [Teece, D., 1986. Profiting from Innovation, Research Policy] and with recently developed models that formalize elements of his framework. More generally, these results support theories about both the market-stealing and spillover effects of innovation.

management
The Illusive Slump of Disruptive Patents

Jeffrey T. Macher,Christian Rutzer,Rolf Weder

2023-06-19

Abstract:Despite tremendous growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, the popular press has recently raised concerns that disruptive innovative activity is slowing. These dire prognoses were mainly driven by Park et al. (2023), a Nature publication that uses decades of data and millions of observations coupled with a novel quantitative metric (the CD index) that characterizes innovation in science and technology as either consolidating or disruptive. We challenge the Park et al. (2023) methodology and findings, principally around concerns of truncation bias and exclusion bias. We show that 88 percent of the decrease in disruptive patents over 1980-2010 reported by the authors can be explained by their truncation of all backward citations before 1976. We also show that this truncation bias varies by technology class. We update the analysis to 2016 and account for a change in U.S. patent law that allows for citations to patent applications in addition to patent grants, which is ignored by the authors in their analysis. We show that the number of highly disruptive patents has increased since 1980 -- particularly in IT technologies. Our results suggest caution in using the Park et al. (2023) methodology as a basis for research and decision making in public policy, industry restructuring or firm reorganization aimed at altering the current innovation landscape.

General Economics
Patent Trolls: Nature and Legal Issues

Parth Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485981

2019-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:This research paper talks about the nature of Patent troll and the legal issues faced and misused by such claimants (Patent Troll). My paper talks about what exactly is patent and what are the basic 5 requirements to have it, which is then further referred to a patent troll, what exactly does patent troll mean, how does this bring up an issue in Patent Law. I have also discussed the legislative steps taken by the Indian Jurisdiction to avoid Patent Troll and ended up the paper with statutory backing up of precedents for a step which may avoid such patent trolls.

English Else

Patent Trolls: Evidence from Targeted Firms

Empirical Evidence on the Behavior and Impact of Patent Trolls: A Survey

Chilling effects of patent trolls

Escaping the patent trolls: The impact of non‐practicing entity litigation on firm innovation strategies

Spillover Effects of Patent Litigation Initiated by Non-Practicing Entities: Evidence from the Capital Market

Do Patent-Trolls Cause the High-Tech Firms to Delist?

DIMINISHING THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF TROLLING: THE IMPACTS OF RECENT JUDICIAL ACTIVITY ON NON-PRACTICING ENTITIES

Who Feeds the Trolls? Patent Trolls and the Patent Examination Process

Do Standard-Essential Patent Owners Behave Opportunistically? Evidence From U.S. District Court Dockets

How do patent trolls affect the technological innovation of Chinese enterprises? Evidence from enterprise patent survey data in China

Patent Enforcement: A Comparative Review Preventing Patent Trolling in Europe

The growing problem of patent trolling

Strategic uses of patents in markets for technology: A story of fabless firms, brokers and trolls

Patent Trolls and Schumpeter's Creative Destruction

What do Firms Gain from Patenting? The Case of the Global ICT Industry

Patent Hold-out and Licensing Frictions: Evidence from Litigation of Standard Essential Patents

A Primer Discussion on NPEs: From the Points of Antitrust Challenges

Profiting from technological innovation by others: The effect of competitor patenting on firm value

The Illusive Slump of Disruptive Patents

Patent Trolls: Nature and Legal Issues