Ratio is an interdisciplinary research institute, with a research focus on the conditions of business and enterprise.

+4684415900

info@ratio.se

802002-5212

Sveavägen 59 4trp

Box 3203

103 64 Stockholm

Bankgiro: 512-6578

About

  • About us
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Media
  • News archive
  • Cooperations
  • Eli F. Heckscher Lectures

Research

  • Areas
  • Labour Market Research
  • Competitiveness Research
  • Climate and Environmental Research
  • Ongoing research
  • Working Paper Series
People

Publications

  • Publications
  • Publications
Search Swedish flag iconSV
Swedish flag iconSVSearch

About

  • About us

    • About
    • Contact us
  • Media

    • News archive
  • Cooperations

    • Eli F. Heckscher Lectures

Research

  • Areas

    • Labour Market Research
    • Competitiveness Research
    • Climate and Environmental Research
  • Ongoing research

    • Working Paper Series
  • People
  • Publications

    • Publications

      • Publications

    Swedish Patent Litigation in Comparison to European

    PublicationArticle (with peer review)
    Anna Horn, Bengt Domeij, Financing of Innovations, Företagandets villkor, Innovation, Juridik, Patent, Per-Olof Bjuggren, Rättsekonomi

    Abstract

    Exclusivity and transferability are the main characteristics of a private property right. The owner of a private property right has the legal rights to exclude others from its use, to appropriate the income emanating from its use and to sell it on whatever terms he and the buyer find agreeable. Insecure property rights discourage investors from investing. Property rights in ideas are called intellectual property rights. Intellectual property rights have a public good attribute. The protected information can be consumed by many at the same time. In order to give incentive to invest in innovations the use of the innovative idea has to be restricted (made exclusive). Without a possibility for an entrepreneur to charge for the use of innovative ideas there would be weak investment incentives. A patent is the intellectual property that intends to give an exclusive and transferable right to innovative technical ideas.
    However, for a property right to be excludable and transferable it is crucial that it is well defined and legally enforceable. In this sense a patent differs from property rights to physical assets as e.g. ownership to land. To legally defend patents from infringements is costly and often results in a judicial decision that declares the patent invalid (revocation). In other words there is an uncertainty in the definition of the intellectual property right that makes the enforcement of patents costly. This transaction cost differs between jurisdictions. This paper studies different aspects of the legal enforceability of patents. More specifically we study how factors as legal costs, potential damages, duration of legal disputes, percentage of court decisions resulting in infringement or revocation differ between jurisdictions and are likely to affect the decisions of patentees to settle or to rely on a court decision. Litigation data from five different European jurisdictions is used.

    Bjuggren, P-O., Domeij, B. & Horn, A. (2015). Swedish Patent Litigation in Comparison to European. Nordisk Immateriellt Rättsskydd, 2015(5), 504-522.

    Details

    Author

    Bjuggren, P-O., Domeij, B. & Horn, A.

    Publication year

    2015

    Published in

    Nordisk Immateriellt Rättsskydd

    Related

    Anna Horn
    Associate Researcher

    annalinneahorn@gmail.com

    Per-Olof Bjuggren
    Professor emeritus

    +46760188712

    p-o.bjuggren@ratio.se


    Similar content

    Third-Generation Innovation Policy: System Transformation or Reinforcing Business as Usual?
    Book chapterPublication
    Bergkvist, J. E., Moodysson, J., & Sandström, C.
    Publication year

    2022

    Published in

    Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, 201.

    Abstract

    There has been a shift in innovation policy in recent years toward more focus on systemic transformation and changed directionality. In this chapter, we describe a collection of challenges that such policies need to address. Based on a review of dominant frameworks regarding socio-technical transitions, we compare these theories with examples of innovation policy in different countries. Systemic transformation across an economy usually requires a process of creative destruction in which new competencies may be required, actors need to be connected in novel ways, and institutions may need to be changed. Our empirical illustrations show that support programs and initiatives across Europe do not always seem to result in such a process, as they include mechanisms favoring large, established firms and universities. These actors have often fine-tuned their activities and capabilities to the existing order, and therefore have few incentives to engage in renewal. As the incumbent actors also control superior financial and relational resources, there is a risk that they captivate innovation policies and thus reinforce established structures rather than contributing to systemic transformation.

    Less from More: China Built Wind Power, but Gained Little Electricity
    Book chapterPublication
    Grafström, J.
    Publication year

    2022

    Published in

    Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, 219.

    Abstract

    This chapter investigates Chinese wind power development and concludes that innovation cannot be pushed by the efforts of many, and that when the state clarifies directions and objectives, these can be achieved but with severe and unexpected side effects. Two topics are explored: wind curtailment and low technological development, both examples of unproductive entrepreneurship induced by government policies. The goal of wind power capacity expansion leads to construction (i.e., generation capacity) but little electricity. Examples of failures include low grid connectivity with, some years averaging 15% of generation capacity broken or unconnected to the grid. A key lesson for Europe is that forced innovation often amounts to little and that the old saying holds up: “no plan survives contact with reality.”

    The book can be downloaded here.

    Selected publication

    Absolute income mobility and the effect of parent generation inequality: An extended decomposition approach
    Liss, E., Korpi, M., & Wennberg, K.

    Selected publication

    No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion
    Grafström, J., & Poudineh, R.
    Working Paper No. 355: The artificial intelligence (AI) data access regime: what are the factors affecting the access and sharing of industrial AI data?
    Working paperPublication
    Bjuggren, P.O. & Long, V.
    Download
    Publication year

    2022

    Published in

    Bjuggren, P.O. & Long, V.

    Abstract

    This paper decomposes the factors that govern the access and sharing of machine-generated industrial data in the artificial intelligence era. Through a mapping of the key technological, institutional, and firm-level factors that affect the choice of governance structures, this study provides a synthesised view of AI data-sharing and coordination mechanisms. The question to be asked here is whether the hitherto de facto control—bilateral contracts and technical solution-dominating industrial practices in data sharing—can handle the long-run exchange needs or not.

    Show more