Talk:Patent pool

Business Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dr. Jeitschko's comment on this article

Dr. Jeitschko has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

The history should not jump from 1917 to 2005. If it goes to the current time it should include MPEG LA, or it should stop with the early examples.
It is important to note that pools are often only recommended or allowed for complementary patents (including standard-essential patents). The purpose of the pool is then to prevent royalty stacking--reducing prices (license fees) while actually increasing profits of the IP holders. These are the "pro-competitive benefits" that FTC and DOJ recognize.
There is a small theoretical literature that calls into question some of the purported benefits of patent pools by uncovering possible adverse affects on innovation once one considers dynamic incentives. Jeitschko and Zhang (2014) voice such concerns and Lampe and Moser (2010) and Joshi and Nerkar (2011) find empirical evidence to suggest that pool formation reduces further patenting activities.
Jeitschko, T., and N. Zhang, 2014. "Adverse Effects of Patent Pooling on Product Development and Commercialization." Berkeley Electronic Journal of Theoretical Economics, 14(1): 1–31. Lampe, R., and P. Moser. 2010. “Do Patent Pools Encourage Innovation? Evidence from the 19th-Century Sewing Machine Industry.” Journal of Economic History 70(4):898–920.
Joshi, A. M., and A. Nerkar. 2011. “When Do Strategic Alliances Inhibit Innovation by Firms? Evidence from Patent Pools in the Global Optical Disc Industry.” Strategic Management Journal 32(11):1139–60.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Jeitschko has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

Reference : Thomas D. Jeitschko & Nanyun Zhang, 2012. "Adverse Effects of Patent Pooling on Product Development and Commercialization," EAG Discussions Papers 201205, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 18:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Patent pool. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111021161947/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/dapp/opla/patentpool.pdf to http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/dapp/opla/patentpool.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing wording?

"One of the first patent pools, Sewing Machine Combination, was formed in 1856, by sewing machine manufacturers Grover, Baker, Singer, and Wheeler & Wilson, all accusing the others of patent infringement. They met in Albany, New York to pursue their suits. Orlando B. Potter, a lawyer and president of the Grover and Baker Company, proposed that, rather than sue their profits out of existence, they pool their patents." Should that instead be: "One of the first patent pools, Sewing Machine Combination, was formed in 1856. Each of four sewing machine manufacturers – Grover, Baker, Singer, and Wheeler & Wilson – had accused the other three of patent infringement. They met in Albany, New York to pursue their suits. Orlando B. Potter, a lawyer and president of the Grover and Baker Company, proposed that, rather than sue their profits out of existence, they pool their patents."

Another point of confusion: were Grover and Baker distinct manufacturers? If so, how could Potter be the president of the Grover and Baker Company? 2601:47:4300:5FD0:0:0:0:20C1 (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Grover & Baker" was a single company. See for example [1]: "The Grover and Baker Sewing Machine Company was organized in 1851". --Edcolins (talk) 21:17, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]