|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Timo Seppälä; Martin Kenney |
| Abstract: | This article investigates how current global intellectual property (IP) litigation provides insight into the competitive landscape of mobile internet, the strategic thinking processes of firms, and the old mobile telecommunications incumbents and new entrants from internet that are vying for space in the new world of mobile internet. To understand the contemporary industry of smart devices, we used the latest IP litigation data from the U.S. to illustrate how the world of essential patents (i.e., the old incumbents in mobile telecommunications) and the world of platform patents (i.e., the new entrants into mobile internet) have become two complementary areas of technology. This analysis address the necessity for understanding the firms involved in IP litigation cases for smart devices in particular and the corresponding patents these firms use in current global IP litigation. This article provides evidence that elucidates the current turmoil in mobile telecommunications; identifies the valuable patents, corresponding patent categories and technology areas; and discusses and analyzes the competitive landscape of mobile internet through the eyes of IP litigation and IP acquisitions. Furthermore, we provide additional evidence that the patent acquisitions by Apple, Google, and Microsoft changed the nature of their ownership of different technologies and important patents in the world of essential patents. |
| Keywords: | Apple, Google, Microsoft, Nokia, ICT, Intellectual Property (IP), IP Litigation, IP Acquisitions |
| Date: | 2012–10–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rif:dpaper:1288&r=ipr |
| By: | Hunt, Jennifer (Rutgers University); Garant, Jean-Philippe (McGill University); Herman, Hannah (McGill University); Munroe, David J. (Columbia University) |
| Abstract: | We investigate women's underrepresentation among holders of commercialized patents: only 5.5% of holders of such patents are female. Using the National Survey of College Graduates 2003, we find only 7% of the gap in patenting rates is accounted for by women's lower probability of holding any science or engineering degree, because women with such a degree are scarcely more likely to patent than women without. Differences among those without a science or engineering degree account for 15%, while 78% is accounted for by differences among those with a science or engineering degree. For the latter group, we find that women's underrepresentation in engineering and in jobs involving development and design explain much of the gap. |
| Keywords: | patenting, gender |
| JEL: | J16 O31 |
| Date: | 2012–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp6886&r=ipr |
| By: | Srinivasan, Chittur S.; Matchaya, Greenwell C. |
| Abstract: | This paper explores the changing survival patterns of cereal crop variety innovations in the UK since the introduction of plant breeders’ rights in the mid-1960s. Using non-parametric, semi-parametric and parametric approaches, we examine the determinants of the survival of wheat variety innovations, focusing on the impacts of changes to Plant Variety Protection (PVP) regime over the last four decades. We find that the period since the introduction of the PVP regime has been characterised by the accelerated development of new varieties and increased private sector participation in the breeding of cereal crop varieties. However, the increased flow of varieties has been accompanied by a sharp decline in the longevity of innovations. These trends may have contributed to a reduction in the returns appropriated by plant breeders from protected variety innovations and may explain the decline of conventional plant breeding in the UK. It may also explain the persistent demand from the seed industry for stronger protection. The strengthening of the PVP regime in conformity with the UPOV Convention of 1991, the introduction of EU-wide protection through the Community Plant Variety Office and the introduction of royalties on farm-saved seed have had a positive effect on the longevity of protected variety innovations, but have not been adequate to offset the long term decline in survival durations. |
| Keywords: | Survival Analysis, Plant Variety Protection, Intellectual Property Rights, Crop Production/Industries, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies, Q12, Q16, |
| Date: | 2012–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:aesc12:134728&r=ipr |
| By: | CRISTINA SERBANICA |
| Abstract: | In the modern knowledge economy, Higher Education Institutions are being required to operate more entrepreneurially, commercializing the results of their research and spinning out new, knowledge-based enterprises. However, the possibility to engage in entrepreneurial behaviours varies substantially between regions and countries. As a post-communist country, Romania faces numerous constraints in this respect. According to Erawatch Country Report (2010), technology transfer activities from universities to business firms are relatively limited, due to a low demand from industry and also relatively weak offer from universities, but many universities are currently actively involved in strengthening their technology transfer capacity. This paper explores different patterns of academic knowledge commercialization in 90 Romanian universities, using the data collected by the Romanian Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports in 2011. In this purpose, we have used the discriminant analysis, due to its advantages in both synthesizing a set of variables and expressing the relationships between them. The discriminant variable by which we divided the universities in groups was the commercial (licensing) income generated by the 90 Romanian universities in 2010. The statistical observation has been carried out on a set of eight variables that were previously standardised using the Z-score technique and tested for normal distributions and homogeneity of variances. The test F for Wilks's Lambda was significant at 0.05 for four of our variables (FTE research staff, research expenditure, patent applications at EPO and new products) and had a Sig. smaller or equal to 0.1 for another four variables (patent applications in Romania, R&D grants with domestic private funding, number of partnerships with private companies and sponsorships). The first discriminate function accounting for 55,8 of between group variability revealed four significant predictors, of which research expenditure (,811*) was by far the strongest one. The other four predictors were grouped under the second canonical discriminate function. The cross validated classification showed that 58,9% of original grouped cases were correctly classified. Finally, we have grouped the universities by their region of origin and placed them in a 2x2 matrix that reflects their position in relation to the two discriminant functions. Policy implications aimed at improving academic knowledge commercialization at each region level are further advanced. Keywords: academic entrepreneurship, knowledge commercialization, discriminant analysis, regional patterns JEL codes: I2, O3, R58 |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p478&r=ipr |
| By: | Nicolas JULLIEN (LUSSI - Département Logique des Usages, Sciences sociales et Sciences de l'Information - Institut Télécom - Télécom Bretagne - Université Européenne de Bretagne (UEB), M@rsouin - Môle armoricain de recherche sur la société de l'information et les usages d'internet - Groupement d'intérêt scientifique); Karine Roudaut (LUSSI - Département Logique des Usages, Sciences sociales et Sciences de l'Information - Institut Télécom - Télécom Bretagne - Université Européenne de Bretagne (UEB), M@rsouin - Môle armoricain de recherche sur la société de l'information et les usages d'internet - Groupement d'intérêt scientifique) |
| Abstract: | Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) proposes an original way to solve the incentive dilemma for the production of information goods, based on von ippel's user-as-innovator principle (1988): as users benefit from innovation, they have incentive to produce it, and as they can expect cumulative innovation on their own proposition, they have incentive to share it. But what is the incentive for producers when they are not users? We discuss this question via a quantitative study of FLOSS projects in "algorithm-based industries". We find that in that case producers hardly participate in such projects. |
| Keywords: | Knowledge economics, Sociology, Open source, Science, Standardization, JEL: O31, O32 |
| Date: | 2012 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00737173&r=ipr |