발명의 특허성 및 특허의 유효성 분쟁결과에 영향을 미치는 요인분석* 7)
Determinants of Success in Ex-parte and Inter-parte Patent Litigation
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 우리나라에서 하나의 발명이 유효한 특허권으로 확정되는 과정에서나타나는 두 가지 분쟁 형태, 즉 결정계(ex parte)와 당사자계(inter parte)를 대상으로 하여분쟁에서의 승리에 영향을 미치는 요인에 대한 분석을 한 최초의 논문이며 기업, 소송, 대리인, 특허차원에서의 특성들을 설명변수로 구성하여 2단계 프로빗 회귀분석을 하였다. 분석모형에 따르면, 상대적 심판제기율, 심판제기까지 걸린 시간, 대리인 교체, 복수(複數) 대리인등에서 결정계와 당사자계간에 평균 한계효과(average marginal effect)의 차이가 나타났다. 결정계의 경우 이들 변수가 승소확률을 낮추는 요인이 되지만, 당사자계의 경우 반대로 승소확률을 높이는 요인으로 작용하였다. 그런데, 결정계와 당사자계 모두에서 특허를 출원한 대리인의 경험이 많을수록 승소확률을 낮추는 역설적인 결과가 나타났다. 그러나, 이는 대리인의 경험이 많을수록 심판제기 확률이 높아지는 표본선택(sample selection)의 효과가 이미반영되어 있기 때문이며, 대리인 경험의 전 범위에 적용할 수는 없을 것이다. 특허의 가치를나타내는 청구항수는 승소확률을 높이는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구에서는 자연인인 특허대리인에 한정하였고, 특허대리인의 경험을 출원대리에 한정하였으나, 앞으로 소송대리의 경험, 특허법인 차원에서의 특성자료, 더 나아가 특허인용 자료와 연결이 된다면 많은 추가적인 연구주제들이 파생될 수 있을 것이다.
Abstract
This paper investigates determinants of litigation success in the two distinctive types of patent litigations, ex-parte and inter-parte cases, which are brought in the process where a filed application becomes a valid patent right. We regress winning rates of patent applicants on the characteristics of firms, trials, patent lawyer, and patent itself, using a probit model with sample selections. The paper finds that the relative suit rate of a firm, time to be sued, changes of patent agents by applicants, and multiple agents among explanatory variables affect ex-parte reexamination and in-parte post-grant patent trials differently in the point of average marginal effects. These variables lower the probability of applicant’s victory in the ex-parte cases, while they raise the probability in the inter-parte trials. However, the experience that agents represent applicants is a winning rate-increasing factor both in inter-parte and ex-parte reexamination,unexpectedly. This result cannot be applied to the entire domain of the variable, since sample selection effects are reflected in the result. The number of claim increases the winning probability of the applicant in the both types of patent litigations. This study has some limitations because it ignores the information on the legal person to which a patent agent belongs, and confined agent’s experience to patent filing. We leave it future studies to investigate the effects of lawsuit experience of patent agent, and those of characteristics of the law firm to which individual patent lawyer is affiliated.
참고문헌 (24)
- 오준병, "우리나라의 특허심사 및 심판에 관한 실증연구: ‘결정계’특허심판을 중심으로", 산업조직연구, 20(2), pp.17~47 (2012), 한국산업조직학회[DOI]
- 임병웅, "理智특허법" (2006), 한빛지적소유권센터
- 천효남, "특허법" (2007), 법경사
- Ai, Chunrong, "Interaction Terms in Logit and Probit Models", Economic Letters, 80, pp.123~129 (2003)
- Bartus, Tamas, "Estimation of Marginal Effects Using margeff", The Stata Journal, 5(3), pp.309~329 (2005)
- Buis, Maarten L, "Stata tip 87: Interpretation of Interactions in non_linear Models", The Stata Journal, 10(2), pp.305~308 (2010)
- Choi, Jay Pil, "Patent Litigation as an Information-Transmission Mechanism", The American Economic Review, 88(5), pp.1249~1263 (1998)
- Chopard, Bertrand, "Trial and Settlement Negotiations between Asymmetrically Skilled Parties", International Review of Law and Economics, 30, pp.18~27 (2010)
- Janicke, Paul M., "Who Wins Patent Infringement Cases?", AIPLA Quarterly Journal, 34(1), pp.1~43 (2006)
- Lanjouw, Jean O., "Characteristics of Patent Litigation : A Window on Competition", The RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), pp.129~151 (2001)
- Academia-Industry Linkages and the Role of Active Innovation Policy-Firm-level Evidence in Hong Kong, "Liu, Wan-Hsin", Kiel Institute for the World Economy, ~, pp.Working Paper No. 1577 (2009)
- Marco, Alan C., "The Selection Effects (and Thereof) in Patent Litigation: Evidence from Trials", Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy, 4(1) (2004)
- McGuire, Kevin T., "Repeat Players in the Supreme Court: The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success", The Journal of Politics, 57(1), pp.187~196 (1995)
- Norton, Edward C., "Computing Interaction Effects and Standard Errors in Logit and Probit Models", The Stata Journal, 4(2), pp.154~167 (2004)
- Priest, George L., "The Selection of Disputes for Litigation", Journal of Legal Studies, 13, pp.1~56 (1984)
- de Van, W. Van, "The Demand for Deductibles in Private Health Insurance: A Probit Model with Sample Selection", Journal of Econometrics, 17(2), pp.229~252 (1981)
- Schmidheiny, Kurt, "Short Guides to Microeconometrics", ~ (2010)
- Waldfogel, Joel, "The Selection Hypothesis and the Relationship between Trial and Plaintiff Victory", Journal of Political Economy, 103(2), pp.229~260 (1995)
- White, T. A. Blanco, "Patents, Trademarks, Copyright and Industrial Desigh, 3rd Ed" (1986), Sweet and Maxwell
- Williams, Richard, "Using the Margins Command to Estimate and Interpret Adjusted Predicions and Marginal Effects", Stata Conference (2011)
- Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data" (2002), MIT Press
- World Patent Report : A Statistical Review, 2008 Edition, "WIPO", ~ (2008)
- "Statalist-st: Marginal effects in Stata 11 (margins vs margeff)", ~
- heckprob-Probit model with sample selection logistic regression-interpreting probit results in Stata-Statistical Analysis,