|  | | 2008 News and Press Releases | | |
HEADLINE NEWS:
Stanford Law School Launches Intellectual Property Litigation Clearinghouse
Staff Writer
Business Wire. December 8, 2008
_________________________________________________________________________
EXCERPT: The Law, Science & Technology Program at Stanford Law School today launched the Stanford Intellectual Property Litigation Clearinghouse (IPLC), a first-of-its-kind online database that offers comprehensive information about intellectual property disputes within the United States. This publicly available, online research tool will enable scholars, policymakers, lawyers, judges, and journalists to review real-time data about IP legal disputes that have been filed across the country, and ultimately to analyze the efficacy of the system that regulates patents, copyrights, trademarks, antitrust, and trade secrets. The Intellectual Property Litigation Clearinghouse database includes real-time data summaries, industry indices, and trend analysis together with a full-text search engine, providing detailed and timely information that cannot be found elsewhere in the public domain. Stanford Law School, along with its partner organizations that funded the development and provided industry insight, are releasing the IPLC in phased modules, and today's release, the Patent Litigation Module, includes more than 23,000 cases filed in U.S. district courts since 2000--raw data for every district court patent case and all results (outcomes and opinions). Intellectual property (IP) is a key driver of the American economy, and IP litigation is big business. By one estimate, the nation's copyright and patent industries alone contributed almost 20 percent of private industry's share of the U.S. gross domestic product and were responsible for close to 40 percent of all private industry growth.* The average patent case costs $5 million in legal fees on each side to litigate. A patent lawsuit can prevent a company from bringing a new product to market, or otherwise stall the kind of innovation that the IP system was meant to spur. |
|
|
