| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Patent article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 31, 2004 and July 31, 2005. |
Requesting an edit edit
 | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
I think it would be relevant to add in the “Benefits” section the following findings from a reliable source (scholarly papers). What do you think? I have a COI with de Rassenfosse. (See my userpage).
Reasoning for inclusion: This empirical evidence contributes to a better understanding of how patent protection can impact the long-term value and durability of innovations. By referencing this study, the article gains credibility and depth, enriching the information available to readers seeking insights into the advantages of patents in terms of innovation sustainability and economic impact.
Requested edit:
A 2018 study using data from the Australian Inventor Survey (AIS) found that patented inventions experience a lower depreciation rate of 1-2% compared to non-patented ones. [1] AM13prime (talk) 13:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ de Rassenfosse, Gaétan; Jaffe, Adam (2018). "Econometric evidence on the depreciation of innovations". European Economic Review. 101: 625, 626, 637.
Requesting an edit edit
| | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
I think it would be relevant to add in the “Costs” section the following findings from a reliable source (scholarly papers). What do you think? I have a COI with de Rassenfosse. (See my userpage)
Reasoning for inclusion: This inclusion helps address concerns surrounding the proliferation of low-quality patents and their potential negative effects on litigation costs and innovation incentives. The study's results provide concrete evidence that the fee adjustment played a role in improving patent quality by reducing the issuance of lower-quality patents. As the patent landscape evolves, these findings offer insights into the potential effectiveness of using fees as a policy tool to enhance patent system efficiency.
Requested edit:
Scholars have discovered that increased patent fees, resulting from the Patent Law Amendment Act of 1982, filtered out roughly 10% of the lowest quality patents, which may address concerns about the rise of low-quality patents leading to increased litigation costs and reduced innovation incentives. [1] AM13prime (talk) 13:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Declined Placing this author's articles in several different Wikipedia pages is stretching it. One has already been placed. Regards, Spintendo 14:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ de Rassenfosse, Gaétan; Jaffe, Adam B. (2017). "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low-quality patents?". Journal of Economics & Management Strategy: 134, 141, 144.