Comments on Proposed Update on Intellectual Property Licensing Guidelines

1 Pages Posted: 3 Sep 2016

Date Written: September 1, 2016


This short comment offers two general reactions to the agencies’ updating of the Intellectual Property (IP) Licensing Guidelines.

First, it recommends that the agencies consider addressing IP licensing issues related to (1) standard essential patents (SEPs), (2) patent assertion entities (PAEs), and (3) drug patent settlements. Although addressed in agency orders and speeches, each of these topics could benefit from further elaboration in the form of guidelines.

Second, it suggests that the agencies in three places could more directly recognize the crucial regulatory and industry context. These three changes would ensure that (1) purposes of regulatory regimes such as encouraging access to generic drugs are promoted; (2) the concerns of massive patent portfolios are acknowledged; and (3) the agencies recognize industry-specific anticompetitive effects in research-and-development markets.

Keywords: intellectual property, agencies, regulation, industry, patents

JEL Classification: K21, L12, L40, L41, L43, L65

Suggested Citation

Carrier, Michael A., Comments on Proposed Update on Intellectual Property Licensing Guidelines (September 1, 2016). Available at SSRN: or

Michael A. Carrier (Contact Author)

Rutgers Law School ( email )

217 North Fifth Street
Camden, NJ 08102-1203
United States
856-225-6380 (Phone)
856-225-6516 (Fax)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics