|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Alberto Di Minin (Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa); Mario Benassi (Università Statale di Milano) |
| Abstract: | We here argue that patent brokers do not only stay in between supply and demand of innovation, but play in between executing complex transactions and taking entrepreneurial risk. In doing so they serve a support function to R&D managers of firms adopting various approaches to technological change. We discuss how economic and sociological theories explain brokerage and its existence. Our qualitative analysis of the current practice of patent brokerage in the U.S. finds only partial evidence in support of such argumentations. We conclude with our own proposition, suggesting that even in very dense environments, the bridging role of intellectual property intermediaries is that of market makers, who leverage their specific investment to play in between technology demand and supply. |
| Keywords: | Open Innovation intermediaries patents intellectual property |
| Date: | 2008–08–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sse:wpaper:200802&r=ipr |
| By: | Fabio Montobbio (Università dell'Insubria, Varese and CESPRI, Bocconi Univerity - Milan - Italy); Valerio Sterzi (University of Bergamo and CESPRI, Bocconi University, Milan - Italy) |
| Abstract: | This paper studies the nature, sources and determinants of international patenting activity in Latin American countries (LACs) and examines the extent to which LACs benefit from R&D that is performed in the G-5 countries (France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States). By using patents and patent citations at the United States Patent and Trademark Office we trace intrasectoral knowledge flows from G-5 countries to LACs. We study the impact of three channels of spillovers: pure spillovers, patent citations related spillovers, and face-to-face contact spillovers. Our results, based on data for Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico, suggest that international knowledge spillovers from the G-5 countries are a significant determinant of inventive activity over the period 1988-2003. In particular we find that the stock of ideas produced in the US has a strong impact on the international patenting activity of these countries. Moreover controlling for US-driven pure spillover effects, bilateral patent citations and face-to-face relationships between inventors are both important additional mechanisms of knowledge transmission. Some of our results suggest that the latter mechanism is more important than the former. |
| Keywords: | Innovation, R&D Spillover, Knowledge flows, Latin America, Patents, Citations, Inventors |
| JEL: | O30 O10 O11 |
| Date: | 2008–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cri:cespri:wp225&r=ipr |
| By: | Francesco Lissoni (Università degli Studi di Brescia and KITeS, Bocconi Univerity - Milan - Italy); Fabio Montobbio (Università dell'Insubria, Varese and KITeS, Bocconi Univerity - Milan - Italy) |
| Abstract: | Authorship and inventorship are attribution rights that contribute to the reputation of individual scientists, but have to be distributed across several individuals, due to the importance of teamwork in both science and technology. For academic teams that both publish and patent their research results, we can compare the social and legal norms that regulate the joint distribution of these two types of attribution rights. We use text-mining techniques to identify 681 “patent-publication pairs” (related sets of patents and publications), for a sample of Italian academic scientists. On average, the number of coauthors is larger than the number of co-inventors, especially in medical-related fields. First and last authors have a lower probability of being excluded from inventorship, as suggested by patent laws. However, the probability of exclusion also declines with seniority, as expected from social norms. Longlasting doubts on the reliability of authorship as a tool for allocating scientific credit are reinforced, and can be extended to inventorship. |
| JEL: | O31 O34 L30 |
| Date: | 2008–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cri:cespri:wp224&r=ipr |
| By: | David, Paul; Aghion, Philippe |
| Abstract: | This paper reflects on the relevance of "systems-theoretic" approaches to theinterdependent policy issues relating to the dynamics of science, technology and innovation and their relationship to economic growth. Considering the approach that characterizes much of the current economics literature's treatment of technology and growth policies, we pose the critical question: what kind of systems paradigm is likely to prove particularly fruitful in that particular problem-domain? Evolutionary, neo-Schumpeterian, and complex system dynamics approaches are conceptually attractive, and we examine their respective virtues and limitations. Both qualities are redily visible when one tries to connect systems-relevant research with practical policy-making in this field. |
| Keywords: | science and technology policy; innovation policy; R&D subsidies; IPR; systems research; economic growth theory; complementarities; positive feedbacks; complexity; market failurees; policy implementation failures |
| JEL: | O1 D50 |
| Date: | 2008–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:12096&r=ipr |