So-called patent trolls may actually benefit inventors and the innovation economy, according to a Stanford intellectual property expert. Stephen Haber ( https://politicalscience.stanford.edu/people/stephen-haber ), a Stanford political science professor, suggests in new research that concerns about too much litigation involving patents is misguided.
A patent troll is a person or company that buys patents – without any intent to produce a product – and then enforces those patents against accused infringers in order to collect licensing fees. Some say the resulting litigation has driven up costs to innovators and consumers.
To the contrary, Haber said, his research with Stanford political science graduate student Seth Werfel shows that trolls – also known as patent assertion entities, or PAEs – play a useful intermediary role between individual inventors and large manufacturers.
http://scienceblog.com/77142/patent-trolls-serve-valuable-role-in-innovation-stanford-expert-says/
[Abstract]: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2552734
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 25 2015, @05:00PM
I suspect agent based modeling may yield better predictive power than more conventional economic approaches at this point. There are certain biases in academia that were brought up in the documentary "An Inside Job", that are difficult to offset. My hunch is that agent based systems would change the nature of bias in the experiment to some degree, though I admit I haven't considered it in enough depth to be able to say exactly how.