Mark A Lemley
Biographic Data
| ID | 1471317 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Mark A Lemley |
| GIVEN NAMES | Mark A |
| FAMILY NAME | Lemley |
| SIGNATURE | LEMLEY M A |
| AFFILIATIONS | William H. Neukom Professor of Law, Stanford Law School, Stanford, California, and of counsel, Keker & Van Nest LLP, San Francisco, California. |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-2944-0582 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 8 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 21 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 8 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1985 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2016 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Patent Holdup and Royalty Stacking
We study several interconnected problems that arise under the current U.S.patent system when a patent covers one component or feature of a complexproduct, This situation is common in the information technology sector ofthe economy. First, we show using bargaining theory that the threat toobtain a permanent injunction greatly enhances the patent holder'snegotiating power, leading to royalty rates that exceed a natural benchmarklevel based on the v…
Why Do Juries Decide If Patents are Valid
For the last two decades, patent lawyers and courts have assumed that theConstitution requires that juries decide whether patents are valid. Butthat assumption rests on an uncertain foundation. Juries did not decidepatent validity during most of American history, and as recently as 30years ago jury trials in patent cases were quite rare. There is,surprisingly, no precedential decision resolving the Seventh Amendmentquestion. And English practice …
Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes
In this paper, we show that there are important differences across patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. We show that more experienced examiners cite less prior art, are more likely to grant patents, and are more likely to grant patents without any rejections. These results suggest that the most important decisions made by the patent office are significantly affected by the happenstance of which examiner gets an application. T…
Probabilistic Patents
Economists often assume that a patent gives its owner a well-defined legal right to exclude others from practicing the invention described in the patent. In practice, however, the rights afforded to patent holders are highly uncertain. Under patent law, a patent is no guarantee of exclusion but more precisely a legal right to try to exclude. Since only 0.1% of all patents are litigated to trial, and since nearly half of fully litigated patents ar…
Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry
infringement even when the accused product does not literally satisfy each element of the patent, if there is substantial equivalence as to each element.The test of equivalence is the known interchangeability of claimed and accused elements at the time of (alleged) infringement.A number of factors unique to software and the software industry-a culture of reuse and incremental improvement, a lack of reliance on systems of formal documentation used…
Private Property
Encouraging Software Reuse
Over the last fifteen years, the primary means of legal protection for computer software has shifted from copyright to patent. In this article, Professor Mark A. Lemley and David W. O'Brien argue that one unanticipated benefit of this trend may be to encourage software reuse. They note that computer programmers traditionally reinvent software components, coding each new program from scratch rather than buying and reusing existing components. This…
Yield of routine annual laboratory screening in the institutionalized elderly
We examined the yield of a battery of 19 screening laboratory tests performed routinely in 70 functionally intact patients, averaging 82.6 years of age and residing at a chronic care facility. The 70 patients underwent 3,903 screening tests (70 admission batteries and 156 batteries at annual intervals). Twenty per cent of the admission test results and 17 per cent of all subsequent annual test results were "abnormal". "New abnormal" results (prev…
Probabilistic Patents
Economists often assume that a patent gives its owner a well-defined legal right to exclude others from practicing the invention described in the patent. In practice, however, the rights afforded to patent holders are highly uncertain. Under patent law, a patent is no guarantee of exclusion but more precisely a legal right to try to exclude. Since only 0.1% of all patents are litigated to trial, and since nearly half of fully litigated patents ar…
Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry
infringement even when the accused product does not literally satisfy each element of the patent, if there is substantial equivalence as to each element.The test of equivalence is the known interchangeability of claimed and accused elements at the time of (alleged) infringement.A number of factors unique to software and the software industry-a culture of reuse and incremental improvement, a lack of reliance on systems of formal documentation used…
Patent Holdup and Royalty Stacking
We study several interconnected problems that arise under the current U.S.patent system when a patent covers one component or feature of a complexproduct, This situation is common in the information technology sector ofthe economy. First, we show using bargaining theory that the threat toobtain a permanent injunction greatly enhances the patent holder'snegotiating power, leading to royalty rates that exceed a natural benchmarklevel based on the v…
Encouraging Software Reuse
Over the last fifteen years, the primary means of legal protection for computer software has shifted from copyright to patent. In this article, Professor Mark A. Lemley and David W. O'Brien argue that one unanticipated benefit of this trend may be to encourage software reuse. They note that computer programmers traditionally reinvent software components, coding each new program from scratch rather than buying and reusing existing components. This…
Yield of routine annual laboratory screening in the institutionalized elderly
We examined the yield of a battery of 19 screening laboratory tests performed routinely in 70 functionally intact patients, averaging 82.6 years of age and residing at a chronic care facility. The 70 patients underwent 3,903 screening tests (70 admission batteries and 156 batteries at annual intervals). Twenty per cent of the admission test results and 17 per cent of all subsequent annual test results were "abnormal". "New abnormal" results (prev…
Yield of routine annual laboratory screening in the institutionalized elderly
We examined the yield of a battery of 19 screening laboratory tests performed routinely in 70 functionally intact patients, averaging 82.6 years of age and residing at a chronic care facility. The 70 patients underwent 3,903 screening tests (70 admission batteries and 156 batteries at annual intervals). Twenty per cent of the admission test results and 17 per cent of all subsequent annual test results were "abnormal". "New abnormal" results (prev…
Encouraging Software Reuse
Over the last fifteen years, the primary means of legal protection for computer software has shifted from copyright to patent. In this article, Professor Mark A. Lemley and David W. O'Brien argue that one unanticipated benefit of this trend may be to encourage software reuse. They note that computer programmers traditionally reinvent software components, coding each new program from scratch rather than buying and reusing existing components. This…
Private Property
Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software Industry
infringement even when the accused product does not literally satisfy each element of the patent, if there is substantial equivalence as to each element.The test of equivalence is the known interchangeability of claimed and accused elements at the time of (alleged) infringement.A number of factors unique to software and the software industry-a culture of reuse and incremental improvement, a lack of reliance on systems of formal documentation used…
Probabilistic Patents
Economists often assume that a patent gives its owner a well-defined legal right to exclude others from practicing the invention described in the patent. In practice, however, the rights afforded to patent holders are highly uncertain. Under patent law, a patent is no guarantee of exclusion but more precisely a legal right to try to exclude. Since only 0.1% of all patents are litigated to trial, and since nearly half of fully litigated patents ar…
Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes
In this paper, we show that there are important differences across patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. We show that more experienced examiners cite less prior art, are more likely to grant patents, and are more likely to grant patents without any rejections. These results suggest that the most important decisions made by the patent office are significantly affected by the happenstance of which examiner gets an application. T…
Patent Holdup and Royalty Stacking
We study several interconnected problems that arise under the current U.S.patent system when a patent covers one component or feature of a complexproduct, This situation is common in the information technology sector ofthe economy. First, we show using bargaining theory that the threat toobtain a permanent injunction greatly enhances the patent holder'snegotiating power, leading to royalty rates that exceed a natural benchmarklevel based on the v…
Why Do Juries Decide If Patents are Valid
For the last two decades, patent lawyers and courts have assumed that theConstitution requires that juries decide whether patents are valid. Butthat assumption rests on an uncertain foundation. Juries did not decidepatent validity during most of American history, and as recently as 30years ago jury trials in patent cases were quite rare. There is,surprisingly, no precedential decision resolving the Seventh Amendmentquestion. And English practice …
Intellectual Property and Patents (6 works) · Business (4 works) · Innovation Policy and RD (4 works) · Law (3 works) · Political science (3 works) · Computer Science (2 works) · Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy (2 works) · Actuarial science (1 works) · Artificial Intelligence (1 works) · Bargaining power (1 works)