|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Jerry Thursby; Anne Fuller; Marie Thursby |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the empirical anomaly that in a sample of 5811 patents on which US faculty are listed as inventors, 26% of the patents are assigned solely to firms rather than to the faculty member's university as is dictated by US university employment policies or the Bayh Dole Act. In this paper we estimate a series of probability models of assignment as a function of patent characteristics, university policy, and inventor fields in order to examine the extent to which outside assignment is nefarious or comes from legitimate activities, such as consulting. Patents assigned to firms (whether established or start-ups with inventor as principal) are less basic than those assigned to universities suggesting these patents result from faculty consulting. A higher inventor share increases the likelihood of university assignment as compared with assignment to a firm in which the inventor is a principal but it has no effect on consulting with established firms versus assignment to the university. Faculty in the physical sciences and engineering are more likely to assign their patents to established firms than those in biological sciences. |
| JEL: | L24 L26 O31 O34 O38 |
| Date: | 2007–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:13256&r=ipr |
| By: | John H. Mutti; Harry Grubert |
| Abstract: | Migration of intangible assets from the United States to foreign countries has become easier due to the ability of U.S. firms to create hybrid entities in their affiliates abroad and to reach favorable cost sharing agreements with them. This strategy was particularly encouraged by the U.S. adoption of "check-the-box" regulations in 1997. Rather than receive royalties from affiliates abroad, US parent firms have an incentive to retain abroad in low-tax countries a greater share of the return to their US R&D. Evidence from several sources for years that span the 1997 policy change indicate a significant response by US corporations in utilizing this strategy. BEA data indicate affiliate earnings and profits grew more rapidly than royalty payments to US parents. Payments to U.S. parents for technical services rose even faster, as would be called for under cost sharing agreements. Regression analysis of affiliate data shows that parent R&D was a more important determinant of royalty payments to U.S. parents than it was for affiliate earnings and profits in 1996, but by 2002 it played a larger role in earnings and profits than in royalties. Cost sharing payments from affiliates in Ireland and from pure tax havens (Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and Luxembourg) are particularly significant, both economically and statistically. |
| JEL: | F23 H32 |
| Date: | 2007–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:13248&r=ipr |
| By: | Pievatolo, Maria Chiara |
| Abstract: | According to Kant, property applies only to touchable things, among which he includes the works of art. For the very principle of private property, a legitimate purchaser has the right to replicate and to share them without restrictions. Kant recognizes copyright only on written texts, by conceiving them as speeches that exclusively authorized spokespersons - the publishers - may convey to the public in the name of their authors. The rights of the authorized publishers, however, are justified only if they help the public to get the texts. In a Kantian environment, open source software would be worth of copyright protection, because it can be conceived as a speech meant to human beings. On the contrary, Kant would treat closed source programs as works of art, without according them copyright protection, because, as none is allowed to read and to understand them, they cannot be conceived as a speeches meant to the public. Closed source programs are like sealed books that no one is allowed to read: why do we keep on taking for granted that they are worth of copyright protection? |
| Keywords: | Kant copyright software |
| JEL: | K11 |
| Date: | 2007–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:4002&r=ipr |
| By: | Clercq, D. de; Hessels, S.J.A.; Stel, A.J. van (Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), RSM Erasmus University) |
| Abstract: | We draw on knowledge spillover literature to suggest that a country?s level of foreign direct investment (FDI) and international trade may influence the export orientation of its entrepreneurs, which in turn may relate to the country?s total level of entrepreneurial activity. Macro-level data from 34 countries during 2002?2005 indicate that a country?s outward FDI, export, and import positively affect entrepreneurs? export orientation, but these effects differ in how fast they manifest themselves. Furthermore, the extent to which a country?s entrepreneurs engage in export-oriented activities affects the subsequent emergence of new businesses. These findings have important implications for research and practice. |
| Keywords: | Knowledge spillovers;Export orientation;Country-level entrepreneurship; |
| Date: | 2007–06–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:eureri:300011416&r=ipr |
| By: | Eva Chang |
| Date: | 2007–06–22 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwneu:neurusp111&r=ipr |
| By: | Valadkhani, Abbas (University of Wollongong); Ville, Simon (University of Wollongong) |
| Abstract: | This paper develops and estimates a cross-sectional model for forecasting research output across the Australian university system. It builds upon an existing literature that focuses either on institutional comparisons or studies of specific subjects, by providing discipline-specific results across all of the ten major disciplinary areas as defined by AustraliaâÃÂÃÂs Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). The model draws upon four discipline-specific explanatory variables; staff size, research expenditure, PhD completions, and student-staff ratios to predict output of refereed articles. When compared with actual averaged output for 2000-2004, the results are highly statistically significant. |
| Date: | 2006 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:uow:depec1:wp06-26&r=ipr |