Citation

Publication Date: 2001-01-01
Format: Journal Article
Bibliography: Mark A. Lemley, Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office, 95 Northwestern University Law Review 1495 (2001).

More

It is common to assert that the Patent and Trademark Office does a bad job of examining patents, and that it should spend more time and money weeding out bad patents. In this article, Professor Lemley challenges that conventional wisdom. Using available data regarding the cost and incidence of patent prosecution, litigation, licensing and other uses of patents, he demonstrates that strengthening the examination process is not cost effective. The core insight is that very few patents are actually litigated or licensed; most simply sit on a shelf unused, or are used only for noncontroversial purposes like financing. Because of this, society would be better off spending its resources in a more searching judicial inquiry into validity in those few cases in which it matters than paying for a more protracted examination of all patents ex ante. In economic terms, the patent office is "rationally ignorant" of the objective validity of the patents it issues.

Other publications by this author

View All

• A Realist Approach to the Obviousness of Inventions
  2008-06-22
• Distinguishing Lost Profits from Reasonable Royalties
  2008-05-15
• Brief Amicus Curiae of 22 Law and Business Professors in Support of Appellants
  2008-04-07
• Are Universities Patent Trolls?
  2008-04-01
• The Trademark Use Requirement in Dilution Cases
  2007-12-31
• How to Make a Patent Market
  2007-11-01
• Categorical Analysis in Antitrust Jurisprudence
  2007-11-01
• The Limits of Claim Differentiation
  2007-10-01
• A New Balance Between IP and Antitrust
  2007-09-01
• Reply: Patent Holdup and Royalty Stacking
  2007-08-01