- The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law
- List of Contributors
- Intellectual Property Law: An Anatomical Overview
- The Basic Structure of Intellectual Property Law
- What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?
- Intellectual Property as a Public Interest Mechanism
- Intellectual Property and Human Rights: Mapping an Evolving and Contested Relationship
- Intellectual Property Incentives: Economics and Policy Implications
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Western Europe
- The Emergence and Development of the International Intellectual Property System
- The Emergence and Development of United States Intellectual Property Law
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Canada
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Australia and New Zealand
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Central and Eastern Europe
- Intellectual Property in Asia: ASEAN, East Asia, and India
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in the Middle East
- Three Centuries and Counting: The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Africa
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in South America
- Patents and Related Rights: A Global Kaleidoscope
- Trade Marks and Allied Rights
- Design Protection
- Rights in Data and Information
- Overlapping Rights
- Intellectual Property Licensing
- Cross-Border Intellectual Property Enforcement
- Users, Patents, and Innovation Policy
- Traditional Knowledge, Indigenous Peoples, and Local Communities
- Intellectual Property, Development, and Access to Knowledge
- Workers in the “Groves of Academe”: The Claim of Academics to Copyright and Patents
- Intellectual Property Meets the Internet
- Intellectual Property and Competition Law
- Intellectual Property and Private Ordering
- Intellectual Property and Public Health
- Intellectual Property and Climate Change
Abstract and Keywords
Users are important innovators in many fields. Often, they do not need socially costly patent incentives to invent, disclose, and disseminate their inventions. A patent-free user innovation (UI) paradigm is likely to be successful and socially desirable when an invention’s value to users has a substantial non-competitive component. If a user innovator values an invention primarily for providing a competitive edge, the patent-free UI paradigm is not viable. Most such inventions have little social value. Some, however, such as improved manufacturing processes, produce significant collateral value for non-users and should be encouraged. Patents may be important for these UIs. Socially beneficial policy interventions to buttress the patent-free UI paradigm might include tools and infrastructure to support user communities and changes to patent doctrine, such as accounting for UI in assessing nonobviousness, patentable subject matter exemptions, particularly for many types of processes, and user exemptions from infringement liability.
Katherine J Strandburg is Alfred B. Engelberg Professor of Law at NYU School of Law.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.