Talk:Patent: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 13:43, 8 July 2024

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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 30 days

Capitalism (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Capitalism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CapitalismWikipedia:WikiProject CapitalismTemplate:WikiProject CapitalismCapitalism

Business Top‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Invention Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Top‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Intellectual property (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Intellectual property, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Intellectual propertyWikipedia:WikiProject Intellectual propertyTemplate:WikiProject Intellectual propertyIntellectual property

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.

Russkrajec (talk · contribs)

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

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)[reply]

References

^ de Rassenfosse, Gaétan; Jaffe, Adam (2018). "Econometric evidence on the depreciation of innovations". European Economic Review. 101: 625, 626, 637.

Requesting an 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.

I would like to see the cost of a patent (including search and attorney fees) included as one of the main reasons for a decline in patents in the US. It is one of the major limitations for deciding on whether or not to choose this route. 24.50.25.147 (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Rassenfosse, Gaétan; Jaffe, Adam (2018). "Econometric evidence on the depreciation of innovations". European Economic Review. 101: 625, 626, 637.

[2] Rassenfosse, Gaétan; Jaffe, Adam B. (2017). "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low-quality patents?". Journal of Economics & Management Strategy: 134, 141, 144.

[1]

[1]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Talk header}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
-{{Vital article|level=5|topic=Society|subpage=Politics and economics|link=Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Society and social sciences/Politics and economics|anchor=Intellectual property law (18 articles)|class=B}}
-{{WikiProject banner shell|1=
+{{WikiProject Capitalism}}
-{{WikiProject Business |class=B |importance=Top}}
+{{WikiProject Business |importance=Top}}
-{{WikiProject Invention|class=B|importance=Top}}
+{{WikiProject Invention|importance=Top}}
-{{WikiProject Law |class=B |importance=Top}}
+{{WikiProject Law |importance=Top}}
-{{WikiProject Law Enforcement |class=B |importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Law Enforcement |importance=Low}}
-{{WikiProject Computing |class=B |importance=mid |free-software=yes |free-software-importance=low |software=yes}}
+{{WikiProject Computing |importance=mid |free-software=yes |free-software-importance=low |software=yes}}
-{{WikiProject Intellectual property |class=B}}
+{{WikiProject Intellectual property }}
 }}
 {{connected contributor|User1=Russkrajec}}
@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 }}
 {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-07-31|oldid1=16335323|date2=2005-07-31|oldid2=19740674}}
-{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Patent/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}
 {{clear}}
+== Requesting an edit ==
-==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
-[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-10-19">19 October 2020</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-12-18">18 December 2020</span>. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Indiana_University/Entrepreneurship_Law_(Winter)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:IHardlyKnowHerName|IHardlyKnowHerName]], [[User:Ethmitch|Ethmitch]].
+{{edit COI|ans=y}}
-{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 06:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)}}
+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).
-== Benefits ==
+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.
-This section needs a rewrite to attribute the arguments for patents, to put them on even footing with the criticisms. I have also removed a huge volume of material irrelevant to these viewpoints, some of which was original research. –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 23:50, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
+Requested edit:
-== Exclusive right to ... ==
-{{ping|White whirlwind}} I have reverted your edit and have added a reference. The added reference comes from the section titled "Effects". The answer to your question: "''Which is encompassed in the term "exclusive right", though, isn't it?''" is definitely 'no', i.e. not "the exclusive right '''to make, use, or sell ...'''", as stated. A patent does not give its proprietor the right to practice the claimed invention because the claimed invention may be more specific that the invention claimed in another patent. Besides, even if there is no such patent claiming a more generic invention, a market authorization may be required in order to be entitled to make, use, or sell the claimed invention. I hope this is clearer now. Cheers --[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] ([[User talk:Edcolins|talk]]) 20:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
-:{{replyto|Edcolins}} Ok, thanks for the explanation. I was just trying to fight the good fight in our age-old battle to clarify legal prose. <small><b><span style="border:1px solid;background:#030303">&nbsp;[[User:White_whirlwind|<span style="color:white">White&nbsp;Whirlwind&nbsp;</span>]]</span></b></small> 21:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
-::You're welcome! --[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] ([[User talk:Edcolins|talk]]) 06:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
+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. <ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = de Rassenfosse | first1 = Gaétan | last2 = Jaffe| first2 = Adam| title = Econometric evidence on the depreciation of innovations | journal = European Economic Review | volume = 101 | year = 2018 | pages = 625,626,637 | url = https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2017.11.005 |author-link=Gaétan de Rassenfosse }}</ref> [[User:AM13prime|AM13prime]] ([[User talk:AM13prime|talk]]) 13:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
-== Wokism strikes again ==
+{{reflist-talk}}
-The data about women's underrepresentation in patents is of dubious relevance to the article; its inclusion in the 'history' is not particularly justified. I propose its deletion. [[User:Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr|Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr]] ([[User talk:Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr|talk]]) 00:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
+== Requesting an edit ==
-:I disagree. I think the information is both relevant and appears to be well sourced. Per [[WP:NPOV]], "all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic" have to be represented "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias". [[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] ([[User talk:Edcolins|talk]]) 05:53, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
+{{edit COI|ans=y}}
+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. <ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = de Rassenfosse | first1 = Gaétan | last2 = Jaffe | first2 = Adam B. | title = Are patent fees effective at weeding out low-quality patents? | journal = Journal of Economics & Management Strategy | date = 2017 | url = https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12219 | pages = 134,141,144 |author-link = Gaétan de Rassenfosse }}</ref> [[User:AM13prime|AM13prime]] ([[User talk: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, <span style="font-size:85%;border:3px solid red;border-radius:15px">[[User:Spintendo|<span style="color:#f00;">&nbsp;<b>Spintendo</b>&nbsp;</span>]]</span> 14:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
+{{reflist-talk}}
+I would like to see the cost of a patent (including search and attorney fees) included as one of the main reasons for a decline in patents in the US. It is one of the major limitations for deciding on whether or not to choose this route. [[Special:Contributions/24.50.25.147|24.50.25.147]] ([[User talk:24.50.25.147|talk]]) 13:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)