|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Gallini, Nancy |
| Abstract: | Inventors and users of technology often enter into cooperative agreements for sharing their intellectual property in order to implement a standard or to avoid costly litigation. Over the past two decades, U.S. antitrust authorities have viewed pooling arrangements that integrate complementary, valid and essential patents as having procompetitive benefits in reducing prices, transactions costs, and the incidence of legal suits. Since patent pools are cooperative agreements, they also have the potential of suppressing competition if, for example, they harbor weak or invalid patents, dampen incentives to conduct research on innovations that compete with the pooled patents, foreclose competition from downstream product or upstream input markets, or raise prices on goods that compete with the pooled patents. In synthesizing the ideas advanced in the economic literature, this paper explores whether these antitrust concerns apply to pools with complementary patents and, if they do, the implications for competition policy to constrain them. Special attention is given to the application of the U.S. Department of Justiceâ€Federal Trade Commission Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (1995) and its companion Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition (2007) to recent patent pool cases. |
| Keywords: | patents, patent pools, intellectual property |
| JEL: | O31 O34 |
| Date: | 2011–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:uca:ucaiel:5&r=ipr |
| By: | James Bessen (Research on Innovation, Boston University School of Law, Berkman Center for Internet and Society (Harvard)) |
| Abstract: | This report examines changes in the patenting behavior of the software industry since the 1990s. It finds that most software firms still do not patent, most software patents are obtained by a few large firms in the software industry or in other industries, and the risk of litigation from software patents continues to increase dramatically. Given these findings, it is hard to conclude that software patents have provided a net social benefit in the software industry. |
| Keywords: | patents, software, software patents, litigation, innovation, startup firms |
| JEL: | O34 D23 L86 |
| Date: | 2011 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:roi:wpaper:1102&r=ipr |
| By: | Bagchi, Aniruddha; Roy, Abhra |
| Abstract: | The incentive of providing protection of intellectual property has been analyzed, both for an emerging economy as well as for a developed economy. The optimal patent length and the optimal patent breadth within a country are found to be positively related to each other for a fixed structure of laws abroad. Moreover, a country can respond to stronger patent protection abroad by weakening its patent protection under certain circumstances and by strengthening its patent protection under other circumstances. These results depend upon the curvature of the R&D production function. Finally, we investigate the impact of an increase in the willingness-to-pay in the emerging economy and find conditions under which there is an improvement in both patent length as well as patent breadth in the emerging economy. |
| Keywords: | Patent Length; Patent Breadth; Productivity |
| JEL: | F20 O34 O31 |
| Date: | 2011–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:31822&r=ipr |
| By: | Hottenrott, Hanna; Thorwarth, Susanne |
| Abstract: | University research provides valuable inputs to industrial innovation. It is therefore not surprising that private sector firms increasingly seek direct access through funding public R&D. This development, however, spurred concerns about possible negative long-run effects on scientific performance. While previous research mainly focused on a potential crowding-out of scientific publications through commercialization activities such as patenting or the formation of spin-off companies, we study the effects of direct funding from industry on professors' publication and patenting efforts. Our analysis on a sample of 678 professors at 46 higher education institutions in Germany shows that a higher share of industry funding of a professor's research budget results in a lower publication outcome both in terms of quantity and quality in subsequent years. For patents, we find that industry funding increases their quality measured by patent citations. -- |
| Keywords: | Scientific Productivity,Research Funding,Academic Patents,Technology Transfer |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O33 |
| Date: | 2011 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:10105r&r=ipr |
| By: | Anderson, Benjamin; Sheldon, Ian |
| Abstract: | Over the past three decades, the agricultural biotechnology sector has been characterized by rapid innovation, market consolidation, and a more exhaustive definition of property rights. The industry attributes consistently identified by the literature and important to this analysis include: (i) endogenous sunk costs in the form of expenditures on R&D; (ii) seed and agricultural chemical technologies that potentially act as complements within firms and substitutes across firms; and (iii) property rights governing plant and seed varieties that have become more clearly defined since the 1970s. This paper adds to the stylized facts of the agricultural biotechnology industry to include the ability of firms to license technology, a phenomenon observed only recently in the market as licensing was previously precluded by high transactions costs and âanti-stackingâ provisions. We extend Suttonâs theoretical framework of endogenous sunk costs and market structure to incorporate the ability of firms to license technology under well-defined property rights, an observed characteristic not captured in previous analyses of the sector. Our model implies that technology licensing leads to lower levels of industry concentration then what would be found under Suttonâs model, but that industry concentration remains bounded away from perfect competition as market size becomes large. |
| Keywords: | licensing, market structure, R&D, agricultural biotechnology, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies, L22, L24, Q16, |
| Date: | 2011 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:aaea11:107832&r=ipr |
| By: | Heike Belitz; Marius Clemens; Christian von Hirschhausen; Jens Schmidt-Ehmcke; Axel Werwatz; Petra Zloczysti |
| Abstract: | We develop a composite indicator measuring the performance of national innovation systems. The indicator takes into account both “hard” factors that are quantifiable (such as R&D spending, number of patents) and “soft” factors like the assessment of preconditions for innovation by managers. We apply the methodology to a set of 17 industrialized countries on a yearly basis between 2007 and 2009. The indicator combines results from public opinion surveys on the process of change, social capital, trust and science and technology to achieve an assessment of a country’s social climate for innovation. After calculating and ranking the innovation indictor scores for the 17 countries, we group them into three classes: innovation leader, middle group and end section. Using multiple sensitivity analysis approaches, we show that the indicator reacts robustly to different weights within these country groups. While leading countries like Switzerland, the USA and the Nordic countries have an innovation system with high scores and ranks in every sub indicator, the middle group consisting among others of Germany Japan, the UK and France, can be characterized by higher variation within ranks. In the end section, countries like Italy and Spain have bad scores for almost all indicators. |
| Keywords: | National systems of innovation, Composite Indicators, Ranking |
| JEL: | O30 C81 H52 |
| Date: | 2011–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2011-036&r=ipr |
| By: | Popesc, Eleodor |
| Abstract: | Entities frequently spend resources or attire debts to purchase, develop, maintain or extend intangible resources like scientific or technical knowledge, design and implementation of new processes and systems, licenses, intellectual property, knowledge on market and brands (including trademarks and advertising titles). Commune samples of incorporated elements in these vast directions are software, patents, authors right, cinematography movies, consumer lists, rights concerning mortgage services, fishing licenses, importation quotes, franchise, relationships with consumers or suppliers, consumer’s loyalty, market share and marketing rights. Not all the above described elements correspond to the definition of an intangible asset, namely the identifiable character, control on some resources and the existence of some future economical advantages. In case an element entering under the incidence of the present standard does not correspond to the definition of an intangible asset, the expenses with purchase or its realization on internal level is recognized as expense when paid. Still, in case achieved as part of a mixture of enterprises, the element in discussion is part of the commercial fund, recognized at the purchase moment. An intangible asset must be recognized in the balance sheet in case estimated to generate economical advantages for the entity and the cost of the asset can be discharged in a credible/reliable manner. Moreover, in respect to this general definition, the International Accounting Standards come with specific elements connected to the recognition of the intangible asset in the financial situations. According to IAS 38 “Intangible assets”, an intangible asset is an asset that can be identified as non-monetary, without material support and possessed to be used in the production process or for the supply of goods or services, to be rented to some other persons, or for administrative purposes. |
| Keywords: | Intangible assets; tangible assets; International standard; accounting; amortization; cost; expenses |
| JEL: | D2 |
| Date: | 2011–07–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:31721&r=ipr |
| By: | Tatiana Plotnikova (Friedrich-Schiller-University, Jena, Graduate College "The Economics of Innovative Change"); Bastian Rake (Friedrich-Schiller-University, Jena, Graduate College "The Economics of Innovative Change") |
| Abstract: | In this paper we focus on proximity as one of the main determinants of international collaboration in pharmaceutical research. We use various count data specifications of the gravity model to estimate the intensity of collaboration between pairs of countries as explained by the geographical, cognitive, institutional, social, and cultural dimensions of proximity. Our results suggest that geographical distance has a significant negative relation to the collaboration intensity between countries. The amount of previous collaborations, as a proxy for social proximity, is positively related to the number of cross-country collaborations. We do not find robust significant associations between cognitive proximity or institutional proximity with the intensity of international research collaboration. Moreover, there is no robust and significant relation between the interaction terms of geographical distance with social, cognitive, or institutional proximity, and international research collaboration. Our findings for cultural proximity do not allow of unambiguous conclusions concerning their influence on the collaboration intensity between countries. Linguistic ties among countries are associated with a higher amount of cross-country research collaboration but we find no clear association for historical and colonial linkages. |
| Keywords: | International Cooperation, Pharmaceuticals, Proximity |
| JEL: | R10 O31 |
| Date: | 2011–06–21 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2011-026&r=ipr |
| By: | David L. Anderson (Queen's University); John Tresler (University of Waikato) |
| Abstract: | In this paper we explore the merits of utilizing citation counts to measure research output in economics in the context of a nation-wide research evaluation scheme. We selected one such system for study: the New Zealand government’s Programme-Based Research Fund (PBRF). Citations were collected for all refereed papers produced by New Zealand’s academic economists over the period 2000 to 2008 using the databases of the ISI/Web of Science and, to a limited extent, Google Scholar. These data allowed us to estimate the time lags in economics between publication of an article and the flow of citations; to demonstrate the impact of alternative definitions of ‘economics-relevant’ journals on citation counts; and to assess the impact of direct citation measures and alternative schemes on departmental and individual performance. Our findings suggest that the time-lags between publication and citing are such that it would be difficult to rely on citations counts to produce a meaningful measure of output in a PBRF-like research evaluation framework, especially one based explicitly on individual assessment. |
| Keywords: | citations; economics departments; journal weighting schemes; PBRF; research output |
| JEL: | A19 C81 J24 |
| Date: | 2011–06–21 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wai:econwp:11/11&r=ipr |
| By: | Alireza Abbasi; Jorn Altmann (Technology Management, Economics, and Policy, College of Engineering, Seoul National University); Liaquat Hossain |
| Abstract: | In this study, we develop a theoretical model based on social network theories and analytical methods for exploring collaboration (co-authorship) networks of scholars. We use measures from social network analysis (SNA) (i.e., normalized degree centrality, normalized closeness centrality, normalized betweenness centrality, normalized eigenvector centrality, average ties strength, and efficiency) for examining the effect of social networks on the (citation-based) performance of scholars in a given discipline (i.e., information systems). Results from our statistical analysis using a Poisson regression model suggest that research performance of scholars (g-index) is positively correlated with four SNA measures except for the normalized betweenness centrality and the normalized closeness centrality measures. Furthermore, it reveals that only normalized degree centrality, efficiency, and average ties strength have a positive significant influence on the g-index (as a performance measure). The normalized eigenvector centrality has a negative significant influence on the g-index. Based on these results, we can imply that scholars, who are connected to many distinct scholars, have a better citation-based performance (g-index) than scholars with fewer connections. Additionally, scholars with large average ties strengths (i.e., repeated co-authorships) show a better research performance than those with low tie strengths (e.g., single co-authorships with many different scholars). The results related to efficiency show that scholars, who maintain a strong co-authorship relationship to only one co-author of a group of linked co-authors, perform better than those researchers with many relationships to the same group of linked co-authors. The negative effect of the normalized eigenvector suggests that scholars should work with many students instead of other well-performing scholars. Consequently, we can state that the professional social network of researchers can be used to predict the future performance of researchers. |
| Keywords: | Collaboration, citation-based research performance, co-authorship networks, social network analysis measures, regression, correlation. |
| JEL: | C02 C13 C25 C43 C51 C52 D02 D85 H81 L25 M11 M12 O31 O33 |
| Date: | 2011–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:snv:dp2009:201176&r=ipr |
| By: | Nicolas CARAYOL (GREThA); Agenor LAHATTE (OST) |
| Abstract: | In this article, we propose an extension of the concept of stochastic dominance intensively\r\nused in economics for the comparison of composite outcomes both the quality and the\r\nquantity of which do matter. Our theory also allows us to require unanimity of judgement\r\namong new classes of functions. We apply this theory to the ranking of US research\r\nuniversities, thereby providing a new tool to scientometricians (and the academic\r\ncommunities) who typically aim to compare research institutions taking into account both\r\nthe volume of publications and the impact of these articles. Another application is provided\r\nfor comparing and ranking academic departments when one takes into account both the size\r\nof the department and the prestige of each member. |
| Keywords: | Ranking, dominance relations, citations. |
| JEL: | D63 I23 |
| Date: | 2011 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:grt:wpegrt:2011-22&r=ipr |