|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
|
Issue of 2018‒02‒05
five papers chosen by Giovanni Ramello Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” |
| By: | Bronwyn Hall; Christian Helmers |
| Abstract: | We analyze the impact of accession to the regional patent system established by the European Patent Convention (EPC) on 14 countries that acceded between 2000 and 2008. We look at changes in patenting behavior by domestic and foreign applicants at the national patent offices and the European Patent Office (EPO). Our findings suggest a strong change in patent filing behavior among foreigners seeking patent protection in the accession states, substituting EPO patents for domestic patents immediately. However, there is little evidence that accession increased FDI by patenting foreign companies in accession countries. Moreover, there is no discernible reaction among domestic entities in terms of domestic filings, although we do find some evidence that applicants in accession states increased their propensity to file patents with the EPO post-accession. Inventor-level information suggests that the underlying inventions originate in the accession states |
| JEL: | F53 F55 O34 |
| Date: | 2018–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24207&r=ipr |
| By: | Lee, Jihong (Department of Economics, Seoul National University); Lim, Hyunkyeong (Department of Economics, Seoul National University); Jeong, Daeyoung (Economic Research Institute, The Bank of Korea) |
| Abstract: | This paper purports to scrutinize the evolving trends of major technologies that have shaped the world’s technology frontier, and at the same time, measure relative standings of major industrial nations in their innovative capacity in production of those technologies. We consider all (over 5 million) utility patents granted by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) over the period of 1976-2015. In analysis, we find the continued dominance of US, the steady performance of Japan, the signs of European decline, and the emergence of new economies that include Korea, Taiwan and Israel. By considering the most popular technologies per each decade, we observe a clear pattern in the evolution of world economic structure, most notably, the IT revolution. Interestingly, it is precisely in these IT-related technologies in which Korea have performed especially well. In the fastest growing technologies of the most recent decade, however, Korea’s performance thus far bucks this rosy trend. Korea’s innovative capacity is not as evenly distributed across all technologies as other advanced nations. US, Japan, Europe, and other Western economies, as well as Israel, all exhibit solid and steady performance in all our rankings. |
| Keywords: | Fourth industrial revolution, Patent, Innovation, Technological development |
| JEL: | O33 O34 O57 |
| Date: | 2018–01–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bok:wpaper:1801&r=ipr |
| By: | Faherty, Emily; Huang, Kevin; Land, Robert |
| Abstract: | The purpose of this paper is to consider if Amazon’s increase in private label brands is the tipping point for transforming the e-commerce giant into a monopoly. To lay the foundation, we initially explore the culture, leadership, and business practices which are unique to Amazon that enabled the company to become one of the U.S.’s largest and fastest growing e-commerce websites. Introduced in 2009, Amazon’s private label business has further propelled Amazon’s growth while creating a competitive advantage for the company by offering high quality products to their customers at low cost options. In considering whether private label brands affect Amazon’s status as a monopoly, we first examine exactly what a monopoly is and if Amazon can be classified as one in its current state. We then take a deep dive into Amazon’s private label strategy, analyzing past performance to make educated assumptions about the future. Our research provided evidence indicating that Amazon’s actions are threatening the cooperative nature of its Marketplace by creating substantial barriers to entry and increasing Amazon’s market share. With this knowledge we make predictions about Amazon’s future and whether it will ever be seen as a monopoly under the economic, legal, and/or social definitions. While Amazon’s case is unprecedented, this paper sources leading economists, journalists, and other academic research to support our theory. |
| Keywords: | amazon, monopoly, amazon marketplace, private label, store brand, jeff bezos, white label, consumer protection, sherman act, anti-trust, clayton act, hart-scott-rodino, federal trade commission |
| JEL: | D4 D40 D42 D43 D44 D5 K21 K23 Q55 |
| Date: | 2017–12–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:83672&r=ipr |
| By: | Naubahar Sharif (Division of Social Science , The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; Institute of Emerging Market Studies, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) |
| Abstract: | Analyzing a unique, previously unavailable, government patent database, this study investigates the determinants of transaction modes (namely to sell, license or retain) of invention and utility model patents in China. The results suggest that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between an invention patent’s quality and the probability of it being licensed out while no relationship exists between a utility model’s quality and the probability of it being transacted. We also find that a firm with economically-motivated patent strategies is less likely to sell its invention patents while a firm with administratively-motivated patent strategies are more likely to transact its patents. |
| Date: | 2018–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hku:wpaper:201851&r=ipr |
| By: | Hegadekatti, Kartik |
| Abstract: | A Company's Brand image is an intangible asset. Though Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) try to capture Brand Value, a company's share value is a result of several factors like performance, initial capital, investor identity etc. Moreover, time needed for a company to be listed runs into several months. Therefore, immediate capitalization of Brand Value is not possible. Initial Coin Offerings on the other hand deliver a wide range of possibilities not provided by IPOs. Most important among them is Brand Tokenization and Monetization. This paper explores Brand Tokenization and Monetization through ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings). Firstly, the concept of Brands and cryptocurrencies are explained. Then the concept of ICOs is discussed. I envisage a scenario where a company tokenizes its Brand and attempts to monetize it. We then evaluate the advantages that can accrue from such a venture. The paper concludes as to how Brand Tokenization and monetization can be realized through cryptocurrencies and its impact on future businesses. |
| Keywords: | ICO, IPO, Bitcoin, Blockchain, Ethereum, Ether, Brand |
| JEL: | D86 F23 G32 L10 O16 O33 |
| Date: | 2017–10–18 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:82833&r=ipr |