|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
商品の説明
内容説明
The United States patent system has become sand rather than lubricant in the wheels of American progress. Such is the premise behind this provocative and timely book by two of the nation's leading experts on patents and economic innovation. "Innovation and Its Discontents" tells the story of how recent changes in patenting - an institutional process that was created to nurture innovation - have wreaked havoc on innovators, businesses, and economic productivity. Jaffe and Lerner, who have spent the past two decades studying the patent system, show how legal changes initiated in the 1980s converted the system from a stimulator of innovation to a creator of litigation and uncertainty that threatens the innovation process itself. In one telling vignette, Jaffe and Lerner cite a patent litigation campaign brought by a a semi-conductor chip designer that claims control of an entire category of computer memory chips. The firm's claims are based on a modest 15-year old invention, whose scope and influenced were broadened by secretly manipulating an industry-wide cooperative standard-setting body. Such cases are largely the result of two changes in the patent climate, Jaffe and Lerner contend. First, new laws have made it easier for businesses and inventors to secure patents on products of all kinds, and second, the laws have tilted the table to favor patent holders, no matter how tenuous their claims. After analyzing the economic incentives created by the current policies, Jaffe and Lerner suggest a three-pronged solution for restoring the patent system: create incentives to motivate parties who have information about the novelty of a patent; provide multiple levels of patent review; and replace juries with judges and special masters to preside over certain aspects of infringement cases. Well-argued and engagingly written, "Innovation and Its Discontents" offers a fresh approach for enhancing both the nation's creativity and its economic growth.
著者について
Adam B. Jaffe is Professor of Economics and Dean of Arts and Sciences at Brandeis University. He is the author, with Manuel Trajtenberg, of "Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy". Josh Lerner is Jacob H. Schiff professor of Investment Banking at Harvard Business School, with a joint appointment in the Finance and the Entrepreneurial Management Units. His books include "The Money of Invention".
登録情報
|
この商品にタグをつける(詳細)タグは、商品との関連性が非常に強いキーワードまたはラベルのようなものです。
タグにより、すべてのお客様がお気に入りの商品の整理と確認を行うことができます。 ※タグは初期設定で公開になっています。詳しくはこちら |
カスタマーレビュー
Amazon.com で最も参考になったカスタマーレビュー (beta)
Amazon.com:
4件のカスタマーレビュー
32 人中、24人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
Eloquent
2004/12/10
形式:ハードカバー
This book presents a clear, concise and convincing argument that subtle changes in U.S. laws starting in 1982 have broken a patent system that was working reasonably well until then. It will be more effective at convincing the average person than most other attempts have been, both because of its style and because it shows that the changes which broke the system shouldn't have been expected to help anyone other than patent lawyers. Their analysis will be useful in helping to avoid the takeover of other agencies by special interests.
Their description of how the system should be fixed is less impressive. Their summary of proposed changes strangely fails to include undoing the change in appeals court jurisdiction which they suggest was a primary cause of the problems. Their argument in favor of patenting software, business practices, etc. is more radical than they seem to realize, as it appears to imply that patents should also be extended to mathematical theorems, yet they act as if the burden of proof should be on their critics.
Their confidence that a traditional patent system is better than no patents is unconvincing (but they do a good job of explaining why it is hard to know what the best system is). They support their position by a few examples such as Xerox, whose copier wouldn't have been invented as it was without patent protection. But it's much harder than they imply to determine that a copier wouldn't have been invented some other way a few years later.
Their description of how the system should be fixed is less impressive. Their summary of proposed changes strangely fails to include undoing the change in appeals court jurisdiction which they suggest was a primary cause of the problems. Their argument in favor of patenting software, business practices, etc. is more radical than they seem to realize, as it appears to imply that patents should also be extended to mathematical theorems, yet they act as if the burden of proof should be on their critics.
Their confidence that a traditional patent system is better than no patents is unconvincing (but they do a good job of explaining why it is hard to know what the best system is). They support their position by a few examples such as Xerox, whose copier wouldn't have been invented as it was without patent protection. But it's much harder than they imply to determine that a copier wouldn't have been invented some other way a few years later.
6 人中、5人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
it's OK
2007/6/4
形式:ペーパーバック
Since the authors are economists I was hoping for an economic analysis of our current patent system like Schiff in his "Industrialization without National Patents" does for the international patent system of the 1800s. Instead it is a work of persuasion meant to sell the author's policy suggestions.
This means that the authors spend a lot of time talking about silly granted patents even though the authors later admit such patents are pretty unavoidable. No patent office has the resources to avoid granting some bad patents.
The author's policy suggestions include a revised reexamination system where patent owners would have to post $50,000 bond to defend a reexamination. I am no phyllis schlafly, but such a system would really favor big companies.
The authors are right that the creation of the CAFC in 1982 has resulted in a strengthening of patents. A lot of this is just a result of a new post-1982 uniformity in the case law.
Some signs of the waning of patents are showing. The CAFC, and now the supreme court, are ruling more for defendants in patent lawsuits. Additionally, in the patent office, the allowance rate of patents has declined from a peak of 71% in 2000 to 54% in 2006.
This means that the authors spend a lot of time talking about silly granted patents even though the authors later admit such patents are pretty unavoidable. No patent office has the resources to avoid granting some bad patents.
The author's policy suggestions include a revised reexamination system where patent owners would have to post $50,000 bond to defend a reexamination. I am no phyllis schlafly, but such a system would really favor big companies.
The authors are right that the creation of the CAFC in 1982 has resulted in a strengthening of patents. A lot of this is just a result of a new post-1982 uniformity in the case law.
Some signs of the waning of patents are showing. The CAFC, and now the supreme court, are ruling more for defendants in patent lawsuits. Additionally, in the patent office, the allowance rate of patents has declined from a peak of 71% in 2000 to 54% in 2006.
Informative and Humorous
2012/1/8
形式:Kindle版|Amazonが確認した購入
I read this for an Intellectual Property class. Not only was the book clear in its examples and concise in its explanations, but it was practical in its suggested solutions and humorous in its storytelling (anyone who can work drag queens into patent law is truly brilliant not to mention funny!)
After reading it from cover to cover (and who can say that about a book that is read for class?), I felt like I had a solid understanding of the material and was entertained while learning--a boon to memory recall on the test later.
After reading it from cover to cover (and who can say that about a book that is read for class?), I felt like I had a solid understanding of the material and was entertained while learning--a boon to memory recall on the test later.
これらのレビューは参考になりましたか？
ご意見はクチコミでお聞かせください。
リストマニア
関連商品を探す
- 洋書 > Business & Investing > Economics > Economic Policy & Development
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Economics
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Law
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Politics
- 洋書 > Professional & Technical > Accounting & Finance > Economics
- 洋書 > Professional & Technical > Law
- 洋書 > Reference > Law
- 洋書 > Special Features > all foreign books
同じキーワードの商品を探す
フィードバック
- カタログ情報、または画像について報告
- 著者からのコメント
- 出版社からのコメント
|
