Are non-practising entities opportunistic? Evidence from litigation of standard essential patents
研究了非实施实体（NPEs）在标准必要专利诉讼中是否比实施实体更可能采取机会主义行为，发现NPEs更倾向于利用声明过程和市场不透明，而实施实体更可能寻求销售禁令。
Abstract Are non-practising entities (NPEs)—firms that specialize in the enforcement of patent rights rather than the commercialization of patented technologies—more likely than other patent enforcers to behave opportunistically? To explore this question, we construct measures of opportunistic conduct by patent enforcers and document the presence or absence of these behaviours in a subset of US patent cases in which opportunism is especially likely to occur: cases that assert standard essential patents (SEPs). Our results suggest heterogeneity across different opportunistic behaviours. NPEs are more likely to exploit the SEP-declaration process and the SEP market’s lack of transparency, while practising entities (PEs) are more likely to pursue bans on the sale and importation of their products. We additionally present evidence that opportunism can affect case outcomes. Declaration and market-related opportunism are associated with a higher rate of settlement in NPE cases relative to PE cases.