Teaching Farmland Drainage Design Features to Contractors and Service Providers

Farmland drainage is an integral part of Iowa’s landscape and plays a critical role in its bio-economy. Production capacities of Iowa soils can only be optimized with well-designed and properly operating subsurface drainage systems. Features needing attention when designing and installing a new system or retrofitting an old one include drainage intensity (spacing and depth), drainage capacity (size and grade), water quality and quantity management (controlled drainage, shallow drainage, etc.), and the economics of payback. Iowa State University Extension & Outreach initiated the Iowa Drainage School in 2007 to educate stakeholders on subsurface drainage concepts customized to the upper Midwestern states. Three hundred thirty-five participants, consisting of contractors, engineers, drainage planners, land owners, farmers, agency staff, and drainage district supervisors, have attended the school. All participants completing the end-of-school evaluation have ranked the school good (45%) or excellent (55%) and reported making drainage decisions on over 1,100 acres per participant. A summary of participants’ preferred methods of surveying and developing topographic maps, methods of determining drainage sizing and spacing, and developing drainage maps is presented. This paper summarizes the nine-year outreach efforts of Iowa Drainage School in terms of what students learned in the school, how they have used the knowledge gained, and how they have applied what they learned in the drainage school

Evaluation of the Reforms of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court 2010-2013

Over the course of this report, we analyse both quantitatively and qualitatively the impact of the 2010­ 2013 reforms undertaken at the former Patents County Court (PCC), now the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC). The reforms introduced a number of changes staggered over the period 2010­ 2013, including a cap on recoverable costs and damages, a reduction of the length as well as complexity of court actions, and a reconstitution of the PCC as the IPEC. In our quantitative case counts we find that there has been a large increase in the quantity of cases filed at the IPEC, post-reforms, while through a comparative study of the High Court (HC) and Patents Court (PHC) we show that with the exception of patent cases, there has not been a corresponding increase in cases at the higher level. We find quantitative and qualitative evidence that the costs cap and active case management by the IPEC judge have been the most influential reforms with respect to the large increase in cases filed at the IPEC post-reforms. We also note that case filings by SMEs have increased substantially following the reforms, fulfilling one of the key aims of the reforms. Importantly, we find that this effect is driven by changes at the extensive (more claimants) and intensive (more cases per claimant) margins of litigation behaviour at the IPEC. Finally, we provide a theoretical model that allows us to gauge the effect of the reforms on those IP disputes that never reach a court. Our theoretical predictions suggest that in addition to encouraging more IPEC case filings, the reforms have had the effect of increasing the quantity of out-of-court settlements as well

HAL/S-360 compiler system specification

A three phase language compiler is described which produces IBM 360/370 compatible object modules and a set of simulation tables to aid in run time verification. A link edit step augments the standard OS linkage editor. A comprehensive run time system and library provide the HAL/S operating environment, error handling, a pseudo real time executive, and an extensive set of mathematical, conversion, I/O, and diagnostic routines. The specifications of the information flow and content for this system are also considered

Is there a patent troll problem in the UK?

This paper reports the findings of an empirical study of patent suits involving non-practicing entities (NPEs) in the U.K. between 2000 and 2010. Overall, we find that NPEs are responsible for 11% of all patent suits filed in the U.K. during this period. Though this is a small percentage by U.S. standards, our study suggests that patent trolling might not be as uniquely American as conventional wisdom suggests. We also find little support for many common explanations for Europe’s relative scarcity of NPE activity. For example, we find that NPEs litigating in the U.K. overwhelmingly assert high-tech patents – even more so, in fact, than their U.S. counterparts – despite higher barriers to software patentability in Europe. Our study does, however, tend to support fee-shifting as a key reason for the U.K.’s immunity to NPEs. We see evidence that the U.K.’s loser-pays legal regime deters NPEs from filing suit, while at the same time encouraging accused infringers to defend claims filed against them. U.K. NPE suits are initiated by potential infringers more often than by NPEs; rarely end in settlement; very rarely end in victory for NPEs; and, thus, result in an attorney’s fee award to the potential infringer more often than a damages award or settlement payment to the patentee. Together, these findings tend to support patent reform bills pending in the U.S. that would implement a fee-shifting regime for patent suits, and may also serve to lessen concerns that Europe’s forthcoming Unified Patent Court will draw NPEs to Europe

Assessing the Effectiveness of the Eco-Patent Commons: A Post-mortem Analysis

The authors revisit the effect of the “Eco-Patent Commons” (EcoPC) on the diffusion of patented environmentally friendly technologies following its discontinuation in 2016. Established in January 2008 by several large multinational companies, the not-for-profit initiative provided royalty-free access to 248 patents covering 94 “green” inventions. In previous work, Bronwyn Hall and Christian Helmers (2013) suggested that the patents pledged to the commons had the potential to encourage the diffusion of valuable environmentally friendly technologies. The updated results in this paper now show that the commons did not increase the diffusion of pledged inventions, and that the EcoPC suffered from a number of structural and organizational issues. The authors hope these findings will inform future fforts to make environmentally friendly technologies more broadly available for use

Green Technology Diffusion: A Post-Mortem Analysis of the Eco-Patent Commons

We revisit the effect of the “Eco-Patent Commons” (EcoPC) on the diffusion of patented environmentally friendly technologies following its discontinuation in 2016, using both participant survey and data analytic evidence. Established in January 2008 by several large multinational companies, the not-for-profit initiative provided royalty-free access to 248 patents covering 94 “green” inventions. Hall and Helmers (2013) suggested that the patents pledged to the commons had the potential to encourage the diffusion of valuable environmentally friendly technologies. Our updated results now show that the commons did not increase the diffusion of pledged inventions, and that the EcoPC suffered from several structural and organizational issues. Our findings have implications for the effectiveness of patent commons in enabling the diffusion of patented technologies more broadly

Pledging Patents for the Public Good: Rise and Fall of the Eco-Patent Commons

Commons and pledge structures have been used to achieve various goals of patent holders, including the advancement of social and philanthropic aims. The article analyzes the formation and structure of a widely acclaimed effort to pool patents for the promotion of green/clean technologies – the Eco-Patent Commons (EcoPC) – as well as its actual impact on technology diffusion and the factors leading to its demise in 2016. We combine quantitative econometric techniques with qualitative interviews to paint the most complete picture of this innovative and ambitious effort to date. Our quantitative results show that the patents contributed to the EcoPC were, on average, less cited than comparable patents, and that the contribution of these patents to the EcoPC did not increase their rates of citation. Moreover, there is no evidence that the availability of these patents through the EcoPC increased the diffusion of pledged inventions. Our interviews revealed significant structural and organizational issues that limited both the attractiveness of the EcoPC to new participants and its value to potential users of pledged technology. Our findings have implications for the effectiveness of patent commons in enabling the diffusion of patented technologies more broadly