Dr. Fabian Gaessler

Senior Research Fellow

Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research

+49 89 24246-591
fabian.gaessler(at)ip.mpg.de

Persönliche Webseite

www.fabiangaessler.com

Arbeitsbereiche

Innovationsökonomik, Wissenschaftsökonomik, empirische Industrieökonomik, empirische Methoden, Innovationspolitik, Patentdurchsetzung, Patentstreitigkeiten, Patenteinspruch, Datenexklusivität, Technologiebeschaffung, Patentübertragung, Pharmaindustrie, standardessentielle Patente, Künstliche Intelligenz

Wissenschaftlicher Werdegang

Seit 2015
Wissenschaftlicher Referent am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb (Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research)

2013 - 2015
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter und Doktorand am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb (Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research). Dissertation: Enforcing and Trading Patents - Evidence for Europe

2010 - 2013
Postgraduales Studium der Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der International Max Planck Research School for Competition and Innovation, München

2009 - 2010
Studium der Organisation, Management und Governance (M.Sc.) an der London School of Economics and Political Science, London

2008 - 2011
Honors Degree in Technology Management am Center for Digital Technology and Management, München

2007 - 2010
Praktika im Beratungs-, Telekommunikations- und akademischen Bereich

2005 - 2009
Studium der Betriebswirtschaftslehre (B.Sc.) an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München und der University of California, Santa Barbara

Publikationen

Artikel in referierten Fachzeitschriften

Contreras, Jorge L.; Gaessler, Fabian; Helmers, Christian; Love, Brain J. (2018). Litigation of Standards-essential Patents in Europe – A Comparative Analysis, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 32 (4), 1457-1488.

    Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Sorg, Stefan (2017). Patents and Cumulative Innovation – Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions, Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017,1, 12800. DOI

    • Using large-scale data on opposition to patents at the European Patent Office (EPO), we investigate the causal effect of a patent’s invalidation on follow-on inventions. We introduce a new instrumental variable exploiting the participation or absence of the patent examiner in the opposition proceeding. According to our baseline model, patent invalidation leads to a highly significant and sizable increase of forward citations. While this is in line with previous studies, disentangling the effect leads us to results that stand in stark contrast to some of the literature. We find that the effects are most pronounced for patents in discrete technology areas, for areas where patent thickets are absent and for patents which are not protected by ""patent fences"". Moreover, the effect is particularly strong for relatively small patent holders facing comparatively small follow-on innovators.

    Cremers, Katrin; Ernicke, Max; Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Helmers, Christian; McDonagh, Luke; Schliessler, Paula; van Zeebroeck, Nicolas (2017). Patent Litigation in Europe, European Journal of Law and Economics, 44 (1), 1-44. DOI

    • We compare patent litigation cases across four European jurisdictions—Germany, the UK (England and Wales), France, The Netherlands—using case-level data gathered from cases filed in the four jurisdictions during the period 2000–2008. Overall, we find substantial differences across jurisdictions in terms of caseloads—notably, courts in Germany hear by far the largest number of cases, not only in absolute terms, but also when taking macro-economic indicators into account—and we further find important cross-country variances in terms of case outcomes. Moreover, we show empirically that a considerable number of patents are litigated across multiple European jurisdictions; and further, that in the majority of these cases divergent case outcomes are reached across the different jurisdictions, suggesting that the long-suspected problem of inconsistency of decision-making in European patent litigation is in fact real. Finally, we note that the coming into force of the Unified Patent Court in Europe may, in the long term, help to alleviate this inconsistency problem.
    • Also published as: ZEW Discussion Paper No. 13-072

    Cremers, Katrin; Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Helmers, Christian; Lefouili, Yassine (2016). Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of the Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 131 (PA), 218-242. DOI

    • In bifurcated patent litigation systems, claims of infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently of each other in separate court proceedings at different courts. In non-bifurcated systems, infringement and validity are decided jointly in the same proceedings at a single court. We build a model that shows the key trade-off between bifurcated and non-bifurcated systems and how it affects the incentives of plaintiffs and defendants in patent infringement cases. Using detailed data on patent litigation cases in Germany (bifurcated) and the U.K. (non-bifurcated), we show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. We also show that having to challenge a patent's validity in separate court proceedings under bifurcation implies that alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find this to apply in particular to more resource-constrained alleged infringers. Finally, we find parties to be more likely to settle in a bifurcated system.
    • Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-14
    • Also published as ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 14-072

    Beiträge in Sammelwerken

    Byrski, Dennis; Gaessler, Fabian (2018). Annex V - SPC Statistics to Chapter 7, in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (Hg.), Study on the Legal Aspects of Supplementary Protection Certificates in the EU - Final Report, 1-16. Brussels: European Commission.

      Gaessler, Fabian; Byrski, Dennis (2018). Chapter 7 - Overall Use of the SPC System in the EU, in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (Hg.), Study on the Legal Aspects of Supplementary Protection Certificates in the EU - Final Report, 91-105. Brussels: European Commission.

        Love, Brian J.; Helmers, Christian; Gaessler, Fabian; Ernicke, Maximilian (2017). Patent Assertion Entities in Europe, in: D. Daniel Sokol (Hg.), Patent Assertion Entities and Competition Policy, 104-129. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

        • This book chapter presents the findings of an empirical study of U.K. and German patent litigation involving patent assertion entities (PAEs). Overall, we find that PAEs account for roughly ten percent of patent suits filed in these countries during the time periods covered by our study: 2000-2013 for the UK and 2000-2008 for Germany. We also present a variety of additional data on the characteristics of European PAE suits and PAE-asserted patents and, finally, consider what our findings suggest are the most important reasons PAEs tend to avoid European courts. We conclude that, while many factors likely contribute to the relative scarcity of PAEs in Europe, the continent’s fee-shifting regimes stand out as a key deterrent to patent monetization.
        • Also published at SSRN

        Monographien

        Gaessler, Fabian (2016). Enforcing and Trading Patents – Evidence for Europe (Innovation und Entrepreneurship). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. DOI

          Diskussionspapiere

          Poege, Felix; Harhoff, Dietmar; Gaessler, Fabian; Baruffaldi, Stefano Horst (2019). Science Quality and the Value of Inventions. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University.

          • Despite decades of research, the relationship between the quality of science and the value of inventions has remained unclear. We present the result of a large-scale matching exercise between 4.8 million patent families and 43 million publication records. We find a strong positive relationship between quality of scientific contributions referenced in patents and the value of the respective inventions. We rank patents by the quality of the science they are linked to. Strikingly, high-rank patents are twice as valuable as low-rank patents, which in turn are about as valuable as patents without direct science link. We show this core result for various science quality and patent value measures. The effect of science quality on patent value remains relevant even when science is linked indirectly through other patents. Our findings imply that what is considered “excellent” within the science sector also leads to outstanding outcomes in the technological or commercial realm.
          • https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.05020

          Gaessler, Fabian; Hall, Bronwyn H.; Harhoff, Dietmar (2018). Should There Be Lower Taxes on Patent Income?, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 18-18.

          • A “patent box” is a term for the application of a lower corporate tax rate to the income derived from the ownership of patents. This tax subsidy instrument has been introduced in a number of countries since 2000. Using comprehensive data on patent filings at the European Patent Office, including information on ownership transfers pre‐ and post‐grant, we investigate the impact of the introduction of a patent box on international patent transfers, on the choice of ownership location, and on invention in the relevant country. We find that the impact on transfers is small but present, especially when the tax instrument contains a development condition and for high value patents (those most likely to have generated income), but that invention itself is not affected. This calls into question whether the patent box is an effective instrument for encouraging innovation in a country, rather than simply facilitating the shifting of corporate income to low tax jurisdictions.
          • Available at SSRN
          • Also published as: NBER Working Paper No. w24843

          Gaessler, Fabian; Pu, Zhaoxin (2018). Openness as Platform Strategy - Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment in Crowdfunding, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 18-05. DOI

          • A platform's decision to open up its marketplace is at the core of its business strategy. It needs to balance between the benefits of market thickness and the costs of potential congestion and quality concerns. We discuss how openness can increase platform value and test our hypotheses by analyzing the strategic decision of a leading crowdfunding platform to switch from access control to de facto openness. The decision increased market thickness on the previously access-controlled supply side of crowdfunding projects. The platform hereby gained market share from its main competitor. Market matches on the platform increased in absolute but not in relative terms. Moreover, quality on the supply side declined immediately, lowering platform value for demand-side users.
          • Available at SSRN

          Dorner, Matthias; Harhoff, Dietmar; Gaessler, Fabian; Hoisl, Karin; Poege, Felix (2018). Linked Inventor Biography Data 1980-2014, FDZ Data Report, No. 03/2018.

          • This data report describes the Linked Inventor Biography Data 1980-2014 (INV-BIO ADIAB 8014), its generation using record linkage and machine learning methods as well as how to access the data via the FDZ.
          • Dieser Datenreport beschreibt die verknüpften Erfinderbiografiedaten 1980-2014 (INV-BIO ADIAB 8014), deren Erstellung mittels Record Linkage und Machine Learning Methoden sowie den Datenzugang über das FDZ.
          • http://doku.iab.de/fdz/reporte/2018/DR_03-18_EN.pdf

          Gaessler, Fabian; Lefouili, Yassine (2017). What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Analyzing Court Selection in Patent Litigation, TSE Working Paper, No. 17-775. DOI

          • This paper examines court selection by plaintiffs in patent litigation. We build a forum shopping model that provides a set of predictions regarding plaintiffs’ court preferences, and the way these preferences depend on the market proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant. Then, using a rich dataset of patent litigation at German regional courts between 2003 and 2008, we estimate the determinants of court selection with alternative-specific conditional logit models. In line with our theoretical predictions, our empirical results show that plaintiffs prefer courts that have shorter proceedings, especially when they compete against the defendants they face. Further, we find negative effects of the plaintiff’s, as well as the defendant’s, distance to court on the plaintiff’s court selection. Our empirical analysis also allows us to infer whether plaintiffs perceive a given court as more or less pro-patentee than another one.

          Cremers, Katrin; Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Helmers, Christian (2014). Invalid But Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, No. 14-072. DOI

          • We analyze the impact of the probabilistic nature of patents on the functioning of Germany’s bifurcated patent litigation system where infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently by different courts. We show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. Our conservative estimates indicate that 12% of infringement cases in which the patent’s validity is challenged produce such ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions. We also show that having to challenge a patent’s validity in separate court proceedings means that more resource-constrained alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find evidence that ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions create uncertainty which firms that were found to infringe an invalid patent attempt to reduce by filing more oppositions against newly granted patents immediately afterwards.
          • Also published as: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Volume 131, Part A, November 2016, 218-242
          • Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-14

          Cremers, Katrin; Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Helmers, Christian (2014). Invalid But Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 14-14. DOI

          • We analyze the impact of the probabilistic nature of patents on the functioning of Germany’s bifurcated patent litigation system where infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently by different courts. We show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. Our conservative estimates indicate that 12% of infringement cases in which the patent’s validity is challenged produce such ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions. We also show that having to challenge a patent’s validity in separate court proceedings means that more resource-constrained alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find evidence that ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions create uncertainty which firms that were found to infringe an invalid patent attempt to reduce by filing more oppositions against newly granted patents immediately afterwards.
          • Also published in Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Volume 131, Part A, 2016, 218 - 242
          • Also published as ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 14-072

          Cremers, Katrin; Ernicke, Max; Gaessler, Fabian; Harhoff, Dietmar; Helmers, Christian; McDonagh, Luke; Schliessler, Paula; van Zeebroeck, Nicolas (2013). Patent Litigation in Europe, ZEW Discussion Paper, No. 13-072.

          • We compare patent litigation cases across four European jurisdictions – Germany, France, the Netherlands, and the UK – covering cases filed during the period 2000-2008. For our analysis, we assemble a new dataset that contains detailed information at the case, litigant, and patent level for patent cases filed at the major courts in the four jurisdictions. We find substantial differences across jurisdictions in terms of case loads. Courts in Germany hear by far the largest number of cases in absolute terms, but also when taking country size into account. We also find important between-country differences in terms of outcomes, the share of cases that is appealed, as well as the characteristics of litigants and litigated patents. A considerable number of patents are litigated in multiple jurisdictions, but the majority of patents are subject to litigation only in one of the four jurisdictions.
          • http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp13072.pdf
          • Also published in European Journal of Law and Economics, August 2017, Volume 44, Issue 1, 1–44

          Vorträge

          04.12.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          Workshop on Intellectual Property
          Ort: Luxemburg, Luxemburg


          27.11.2018
          Knowledge Lost in Capital
          Behavioral and Empirical Work in Progress Seminar
          Ort: Alicante, Spanien


          24.10.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          IP Statistics for Decision Makers Conference
          Ort: Alicante, Spanien


          05.09.2018
          A Practitioner’s Guide to Empirical Research on Patents and Innovation
          European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference
          Ort: Berlin


          14.08.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          Academy of Management 78th Annual Meeting
          Ort: Chicago, USA


          20.06.2018
          Patent Transfer in Europe - Data Description and Stylized PAE Facts
          EPIP NPE/PAE Workshop 2018
          Ort: Bordeaux, Frankreich


          15.06.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          Barcelona GSE Workshop on Economics of Science and Innovation
          Ort: Barcelona, Spanien


          13.06.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          DRUID18 Conference
          Ort: Kopenhagen, Dänemark


          27.03.2018
          Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          NBER Productivity Seminar
          Ort: Cambridge, Vereinigtes Königreich


          09.02.2018br />Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          Law & Economics Seminar
          Ort: Lüttich, Belgien


          23.11.2017
          Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          MSI Seminar, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
          Ort: Leuven, Belgien


          05.09.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
          European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference
          Ort: Bordeaux, Frankreich


          02.09.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
          Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics, Maastricht University
          Ort: Maastricht, Niederlande


          07.08.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
          Academy of Management Annual Meeting
          Ort: Atlanta, USA


          24.07.2017
          Patent Boxes and Patent Transfers
          Summer School on Taxation and R&D, Universität Mannheim
          Ort: Mannheim


          20.06.2017
          Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
          Behavioral and Empirical Work in Progress Seminar, Technical University of Munich
          Ort: München


          13.06.2017
          Taking the Crowd by the Hand - The Intermediary Role of Crowdfunding Platforms
          DRUID 17 Conference, New York University
          Ort: New York, USA


          30.05.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
          Munich Summer Institute 2017
          Ort: München


          26.05.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
          Strategy, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Faculty Workshop, IE Business School
          Ort: Madrid, Spanien


          15.05.2017
          Taking the Crowd by the Hand - The Intermediary Role of Crowdfunding Platforms

          ZEW Economics of Innovation and Patenting Conference 2017
          Ort: Mannheim


          03.04.2017
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
          SFB Competiton and Rationality Workshop
          Ort: Berlin


          16.03.2017
          Patent Litigation in Europe
          European Intellectual Property Rights and Jurisdiction in Need of Grand Design? MPI Workshop
          Ort: Harnackhaus Berlin


          29.11.2016
          Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
          IO and Trade Seminar
          Ort: München


          03.09.2016
          Litigation of Standard-Essential Patents in Europe - A Comparative Analysis
          European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference, University of Oxford
          Ort: Oxford, Vereinigtes Königreich


          02.09.2016
          Patent Transfers in Europe - Data and Methodological Report
          European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference, University of Oxford
          Ort: Oxford, Vereinigtes Königreich


          18.05.2016
          What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
          17th CEPR/JIE School and Conference on Applied Industrial Organisation
          Ort: London, Vereinigtes Königreich


          01.09.2016
          What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
          European Policy for Intellectual Property 10th Annual Conference
          Ort: Glasgow, Vereinigtes Königreich


          28.08.2015
          What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
          42nd Annual Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics
          Ort: München


          02.07.2015
          Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation at German Regional Courts
          6th ZEW/MaCCI Conference on the Economics of Innovation and Patenting
          Ort: Mannheim


          29.06.2015
          What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
          Economic Analysis of Litigation Workshop
          Ort: Turin, Italien


          27.06.2015
          Paneldiskussion: Zur Zukunft der Internetwirtschaft - warum brauchen Unternehmen Patente?
          Alumnikonferenz am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb
          Ort: München


          11.06.2015
          Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation at German Regional Courts
          Workshop: 2nd International Meeting in Law & Economics at the University Paris 2-Panthéon-Assas
          Ort: Paris, Frankreich


          29.08.2014
          Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
          41st Annual Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics
          Ort: Mailand, Italien


          23.06.2014
          Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
          Munich Conference on Innovation and Competition 2014
          Ort: Schloss Ringberg


          13.01.2014
          Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation in Germany
          Transatlantic Workshop on Intellectual Property Research
          Ort: Zürich, Schweiz


          09.08.2013
          Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
          Comparative Patent Litigation in Europe and Evidence on Bifurcation, Workshop at Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys
          Ort: London, Vereinigtes Königreich

          Ehrungen und wissenschaftliche Preise

          2017 Otto-Hahn-Medaille der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft

          Projekte