In 2015, two opposing groups of legal and economic scholars sent open letters to Congress. The first group argued for patent reforms based upon empirical evidence indicating “that the net effect of patent litigation is to raise the cost of innovation and inhibit technological progress.” Seemingly in reaction to the first letter, the second group expressed “deep concerns with the many flawed, unreliable, or incomplete studies about the American patent system that have been provided to members of Congress.”
In his Patently-O Patent Law Journal essay, James Daily reports the results of his investigation into the signatories to these open letters. He finds, inter alia, that the signatories of the second letter are (1) more likely to be donors to the Republican Party and (2) more likely to be registered patent attorneys.
Read the Article: James E. Daily, An Empirical Analysis of Some Proponents and Opponents of Patent Reform, 2016 Patently-O Patent Law Journal 1.