Jeffrey M. Kuhn

Does Winning a Patent Race Lead to More Follow-On Innovation?

Competition between firms to invent and patent an idea, or “patent racing,” has been much discussed in theory, but seldom analyzed empirically. This article introduces an empirical way to identify patent races, and provides the first broad-based view of them in the real world. It reveals that patent races are common, particularly in information-technology fields. The analysis is then extended to get the causal impact of winning a patent race, using a regression-discontinuity approach. It shows that patent race winners do significantly more follow-on innovation, and the follow-on research that they do is more similar to what was covered by the patent.

Patentable Subject Matter Matters: New Uses for an Old Doctrine

Patentable subject matter historically constituted a significant bar to patentability. However, technological growth coupled with the expansion of patent law under the Federal Circuit has left patentable subject matter largely irrelevant for practical purposes. Although presenting easily surmountable drafting difficulties, subject matter has rarely presented a difficult hurdle to obtaining a patent in recent years. This changed with the Supreme Courts grant of certiorari in Lab. Corp. v. Metabolite. Although certiorari was ultimately dismissed as improvidently granted, the Supreme Courts renewed interest in patent law coupled with Justice Breyers dissent from dismissal suggests that the Court is ready to take a new look at subject matter doctrine. This Article analyzes the history of the subject matter doctrine and examines in detail the subject matter issues presented by modern technological developments. Ultimately the Article highlights a proposed test for patentabity in the biotechnology space and suggests a new formulation of the patentable subject matter doctrine to deal with patents on abstract technologies. New technology makes patentable subject matter more important, not less, but courts need new tools to enforce patent law efficiently for the latest technological advances.

How to Measure and Draw Causal Inferences with Patent Scope

This paper presents an easy-to-use measure of patent scope that is grounded both in patent law and in the practices of patent attorneys. We validate our measure by showing both that patent attorneys’ subjective assessments of scope agree with our estimates, and that the behaviour of patenters is consistent with it. Using our validation exercise, we find that previous measures of patent scope (i.e. the number of patent classes, the number of citations made by future patents, and the number of claims in a patent) are uninformative or misleading. To facilitate drawing causal inferences with our measure, we show how it can be used to create an instrumental variable, patent examiner Scope Toughness, which we also validate. We then demonstrate the power of this instrument by examining standard-essential patents. We show that an (exogenous) diminishment of patent scope leads to patents being much less likely to be declared standard-essential.

Patent Citations Reexamined: New Data and Methods

Many studies rely on patent citations to measure intellectual heritage and impact. In this article, we show that the nature of patent citations has changed dramatically in recent years. Today, a small minority of patent applications are generating a large majority of patent citations, and the mean technological similarity between citing and cited patents has fallen considerably. We replicate several well-known studies in industrial organization and innovation economics and demonstrate how generalized assumptions about the nature of patent citations have misled the field.@ @ a「ウエイ。」エ eクゥウエゥョァ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@ッヲ@ゥョョッカ。エゥッョ@ッヲエ・ョ@イ・ャケ@ッョ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@エッ@ゥョ、ゥ」。エ・@ゥョエ・ャャ・」エオ。ャ@ャゥョ・。ァ・@。ョ、@ゥュー。」エN@w・ ウィッキ@エィ。エ@エィ・@、。エ。@ァ・ョ・イ。エゥョァ@ーイッ」・ウウ@ヲッイ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ィ。ウ@」ィ。ョァ・、@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ウゥョ」・@」ゥエ。エゥッョM「。ウ・、 ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@キ・イ・@ッイゥァゥョ。ャャケ@カ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@tッ、。ケL@ヲ。イ@ュッイ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@。イ・@」イ・。エ・、@ー・イ@ー。エ・ョエL@。ョ、@エィ・@ュ・。ョ エ・」ィョッャッァゥ」。ャ@ウゥュゥャ。イゥエケ@「・エキ・・ョ@」ゥエゥョァ@。ョ、@」ゥエ・、@ー。エ・ョエウ@ィ。ウ@ヲ。ャャ・ョ@ウゥァョゥヲゥ」。ョエャケN@tィ・ウ・@」ィ。ョァ・ウ@ウオァァ・ウエ@エィ。エ@エィ・ オウ・@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ヲッイ@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@ョ・・、ウ@エッ@「・@イ・Mカ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@w・@、・カ・ャッー@。@ョッカ・ャ@カ・」エッイ@ウー。」・@ュッ、・ャ@エッ ・ク。ュゥョ・@エィ・@ゥョヲッイュ。エゥッョ@」ッョエ・ョエ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウL@。ョ、@ウィッキ@エィ。エ@ュ・エィッ、ウ@ヲッイ@ウオ「Mウ・エエゥョァ@。ョ、Oッイ@キ・ゥァィエゥョァ ゥョヲッイュ。エゥカ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@」。ョ@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ゥューイッカ・@エィ・@ーイ・、ゥ」エゥカ・@ーッキ・イ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウN@w・@ュ。ォ・ 、。エ。@ヲッイ@。@「。ウゥ」@」ッイイ・」エゥッョ@。カ。ゥャ。「ャ・@ヲッイ@ヲオエオイ・@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@エィイッオァィ@エィ・@p。エ・ョエ@r・ウ・。イ」ィ@fッオョ、。エゥッョN

Patent-to-Patent Similarity: A Vector Space Model

Current measures of patent similarity rely on the manual classification of patents into taxonomies. In this project, we leverage information retrieval theory and Big Data methods to develop a machine-automated measure of patent-to-patent similarity. We validate the measure and demonstrate that it significantly improves upon existing patent classification systems. Moreover, we illustrate how a pairwise similarity comparison of any and every two patents in the USPTO patent space can open new avenues of research in economics, management, and public policy. We make the data available for future scholarship through the Patent Research Foundation.

Patent Citations: An Examination of the Data Generating Process

Many studies rely on patent citations to measure intellectual heritage and impact. In this article, we show that the nature of patent citations has changed dramatically in recent years. Today, a small minority of patent applications are generating a large majority of patent citations, and the mean technological similarity between citing and cited patents has fallen considerably. We replicate several well-known studies in industrial organization and innovation economics and demonstrate how generalized assumptions about the nature of patent citations have misled the field.@ @ a「ウエイ。」エ eクゥウエゥョァ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@ッヲ@ゥョョッカ。エゥッョ@ッヲエ・ョ@イ・ャケ@ッョ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@エッ@ゥョ、ゥ」。エ・@ゥョエ・ャャ・」エオ。ャ@ャゥョ・。ァ・@。ョ、@ゥュー。」エN@w・ ウィッキ@エィ。エ@エィ・@、。エ。@ァ・ョ・イ。エゥョァ@ーイッ」・ウウ@ヲッイ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ィ。ウ@」ィ。ョァ・、@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ウゥョ」・@」ゥエ。エゥッョM「。ウ・、 ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@キ・イ・@ッイゥァゥョ。ャャケ@カ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@tッ、。ケL@ヲ。イ@ュッイ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@。イ・@」イ・。エ・、@ー・イ@ー。エ・ョエL@。ョ、@エィ・@ュ・。ョ エ・」ィョッャッァゥ」。ャ@ウゥュゥャ。イゥエケ@「・エキ・・ョ@」ゥエゥョァ@。ョ、@」ゥエ・、@ー。エ・ョエウ@ィ。ウ@ヲ。ャャ・ョ@ウゥァョゥヲゥ」。ョエャケN@tィ・ウ・@」ィ。ョァ・ウ@ウオァァ・ウエ@エィ。エ@エィ・ オウ・@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ヲッイ@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@ョ・・、ウ@エッ@「・@イ・Mカ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@w・@、・カ・ャッー@。@ョッカ・ャ@カ・」エッイ@ウー。」・@ュッ、・ャ@エッ ・ク。ュゥョ・@エィ・@ゥョヲッイュ。エゥッョ@」ッョエ・ョエ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウL@。ョ、@ウィッキ@エィ。エ@ュ・エィッ、ウ@ヲッイ@ウオ「Mウ・エエゥョァ@。ョ、Oッイ@キ・ゥァィエゥョァ ゥョヲッイュ。エゥカ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@」。ョ@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ゥューイッカ・@エィ・@ーイ・、ゥ」エゥカ・@ーッキ・イ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウN@w・@ュ。ォ・ 、。エ。@ヲッイ@。@「。ウゥ」@」ッイイ・」エゥッョ@。カ。ゥャ。「ャ・@ヲッイ@ヲオエオイ・@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@エィイッオァィ@エィ・@p。エ・ョエ@r・ウ・。イ」ィ@fッオョ、。エゥッョN

Patent Citations Reexamined

Many studies rely on patent citations to measure intellectual heritage and impact. In this article, we show that the nature of patent citations has changed dramatically in recent years. Today, a small minority of patent applications are generating a large majority of patent citations, and the mean technological similarity between citing and cited patents has fallen considerably. We replicate several well-known studies in industrial organization and innovation economics and demonstrate how generalized assumptions about the nature of patent citations have misled the field.@ @ a「ウエイ。」エ eクゥウエゥョァ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@ッヲ@ゥョョッカ。エゥッョ@ッヲエ・ョ@イ・ャケ@ッョ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@エッ@ゥョ、ゥ」。エ・@ゥョエ・ャャ・」エオ。ャ@ャゥョ・。ァ・@。ョ、@ゥュー。」エN@w・ ウィッキ@エィ。エ@エィ・@、。エ。@ァ・ョ・イ。エゥョァ@ーイッ」・ウウ@ヲッイ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ィ。ウ@」ィ。ョァ・、@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ウゥョ」・@」ゥエ。エゥッョM「。ウ・、 ュ・。ウオイ・ウ@キ・イ・@ッイゥァゥョ。ャャケ@カ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@tッ、。ケL@ヲ。イ@ュッイ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@。イ・@」イ・。エ・、@ー・イ@ー。エ・ョエL@。ョ、@エィ・@ュ・。ョ エ・」ィョッャッァゥ」。ャ@ウゥュゥャ。イゥエケ@「・エキ・・ョ@」ゥエゥョァ@。ョ、@」ゥエ・、@ー。エ・ョエウ@ィ。ウ@ヲ。ャャ・ョ@ウゥァョゥヲゥ」。ョエャケN@tィ・ウ・@」ィ。ョァ・ウ@ウオァァ・ウエ@エィ。エ@エィ・ オウ・@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@ヲッイ@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@ョ・・、ウ@エッ@「・@イ・Mカ。ャゥ、。エ・、N@w・@、・カ・ャッー@。@ョッカ・ャ@カ・」エッイ@ウー。」・@ュッ、・ャ@エッ ・ク。ュゥョ・@エィ・@ゥョヲッイュ。エゥッョ@」ッョエ・ョエ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョウL@。ョ、@ウィッキ@エィ。エ@ュ・エィッ、ウ@ヲッイ@ウオ「Mウ・エエゥョァ@。ョ、Oッイ@キ・ゥァィエゥョァ ゥョヲッイュ。エゥカ・@」ゥエ。エゥッョウ@」。ョ@ウオ「ウエ。ョエゥ。ャャケ@ゥューイッカ・@エィ・@ーイ・、ゥ」エゥカ・@ーッキ・イ@ッヲ@ー。エ・ョエ@」ゥエ。エゥッョ@ュ・。ウオイ・ウN@w・@ュ。ォ・ 、。エ。@ヲッイ@。@「。ウゥ」@」ッイイ・」エゥッョ@。カ。ゥャ。「ャ・@ヲッイ@ヲオエオイ・@ウ」ィッャ。イウィゥー@エィイッオァィ@エィ・@p。エ・ョエ@r・ウ・。イ」ィ@fッオョ、。エゥッョN