nep-ipr New Economics Papers
on Intellectual Property Rights
Issue of 2013‒01‒07
eight papers chosen by
Roland Kirstein
Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg

  1. Dulling the Cutting Edge: How Patent-Related Policies and Practices Hamper Innovation in China By Prud'homme, Dan
  2. Patent Laws and Innovation: Evidence from Economic History By Petra Moser
  3. How To Kill Inventors: Testing The Massacrator© Algorithm For Inventor Disambiguation By Michele PEZZONI (University of Milano-Bicocca - KiTES-Università Bocconi - Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques); Francesco LISSONI (GREThA, CNRS, UMR 5113 - KiTES); Gianluca TARASCONI (KiTES, Università Bocconi)
  4. Cross-country difference in R&D productivity Comparison of 11 European economies By Lööf, Hans; Savin, Maxim
  5. Patenting in family firms By Alessandra Tognazzo; Federica Destro; Paolo Gubitta
  6. Patent litigation settlement in Germany: Why parties settle during trial By Cremers, Katrin; Schliessler, Paula
  7. Are academics who publish more also more cited? Individual determinants of publication and citation records By Clément Bosquet; Pierre-Philippe Combes;
  8. The Impact of Host Countries' University Research and University-Industry Collaboration on the Location of Research and Development: Evidence from Japanese multinational firms By SUZUKI Shinya; Rene BELDERBOS; KWON Hyeog Ug; FUKAO Kyoji

  1. By: Prud'homme, Dan
    Abstract: This study’s statistical analysis shows that patent quality and innovation in China deserve improvement, and an in-depth legal, management science, and economic analysis in the study shows that various patent-related policies and practices actually hamper patent quality and innovation in China. Over 50 recommendations for reform are provided. The study is divided into four chapters, summaries of which are as follows: Chapter 1: Although China became the world leader in quantity of domestically filed patent applications in 2011, the quality of these patents needs improvement. Also, while certain innovation in China is rising, the country’s actual innovation appears overhyped by some sources. Chapter 2: There appears to be an overly heavy focus on government-set quantitative patent targets in China, which can hamper patent quality and innovation. This overemphasis involves over 10 national-level and over 150 municipal/provincial quantitative patent targets, mostly to be met by 2015, which are also linked to performance evaluations for SoEs, Party officials and government ministries, universities and research institutes, and other entities. Chapter 3: China has a wide-range of other policies, many of which are at least partially meant to encourage patents, that can actually discourage quality patents, and highest-quality patents in particular, and innovation. Examples of these policies include a variety of measures with requirements for “indigenous intellectual property rights” that are linked to financial incentives (many of which are unrelated to government procurement); a range of other government-provided financial incentives for patent development (e.g. certain patent filing subsidies); inappropriate inventor remuneration rules; discriminatory standardisation approaches; and a wide range of others. Chapter 4: There are a host of concerns surrounding rules and procedures for patent application review and those for enforcement of patent disputes that can hamper building of quality patents and innovation in China. These include concerns about abuse of patent rights, difficulties invalidating utility models, and a wide range of other issues.
    Keywords: China's innovation; indigenous innovation policies; innovation incentives; patent quality; China's patent targets; China's patent policy; patent enforcement
    JEL: O38 P48 O33 O32 K11 O3 K2 L51 K3 O34 O2 O39 D23 D03 O31
    Date: 2012–08
  2. By: Petra Moser
    Abstract: What is the optimal system of intellectual property rights to encourage innovation? Empirical evidence from economic history can help to inform important policy questions that have been difficult to answer with modern data: 1) Does the existence of strong patent laws encourage innovation? And 2) May patent laws influence the direction – as opposed to the rate – of technical change? Economic history can also help to shed light on the effectiveness of policy tools that are intended to address problems with the current patent system: 3) How do patent pools, as a mechanism to mitigate litigation risks, influence the creation of new technologies? 4) Will compulsory licensing, as a mechanism to improve access to essential innovations in developing countries, discourage innovation in the developing countries? This essay summarizes results of existing research and highlights promising areas for future research.
    JEL: K0 L24 L4 N0 O3 O31 O33 O34 Q16 Q55
    Date: 2012–12
  3. By: Michele PEZZONI (University of Milano-Bicocca - KiTES-Università Bocconi - Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques); Francesco LISSONI (GREThA, CNRS, UMR 5113 - KiTES); Gianluca TARASCONI (KiTES, Università Bocconi)
    Abstract: Inventor disambiguation is an increasingly important issue for users of patent data. We propose and test a number of refinements to the Massacrator© algorithm, originally proposed by Lissoni et al. (2006) and now applied to APE-INV, a free access database funded by the European Science Foundation. Following Raffo and Lhuillery (2009) we describe disambiguation as a 3-step process: cleaning&parsing, matching, and filtering. By means of sensitivity analysis, based on MonteCarlo simulations, we show how various filtering criteria can be manipulated in order to obtain optimal combinations of precision and recall (type I and type II errors). We also show how these different combinations generate different results for applications to studies on inventors\' productivity, mobility, and networking. The filtering criteria based upon information on inventors\' addresses are sensitive to data quality, while those based upon information on co-inventorship networks are always effective. Details on data access and data quality improvement via feedback collection are also discussed.
    Keywords: patent data, inventors, name disambiguation
    JEL: C15 C81 O34
    Date: 2012
  4. By: Lööf, Hans (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology); Savin, Maxim (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology)
    Abstract: This paper examines differences in R&D productivity across a group of geographically adjacent economies. By distributing close to 355,000 patents across 18 industries in 11 countries, we find clear and systematic country patterns when taking into account differences in industrial structure, institutional arrangements and R&D intensity. This finding supports the argument that innovation systems are important for an industry’s capacity to generate new patentable knowledge.
    Keywords: Patent; R&D; Innovation; international comparison; panel data
    JEL: L60 O33 O50
    Date: 2012–12–19
  5. By: Alessandra Tognazzo (University of Padova); Federica Destro (University of Padova); Paolo Gubitta (University of Padova)
    Abstract: In this paper we analyze patenting activities of family businesses, as compared to non-family ones. The main question is whether family business patent more or less. Then, we also analyze the composition of the inventor group and patent characteristics. To investigate these issues we analyzed a sample of 234 Italian businesses. We find some evidence that family firms differ in their patenting strategy from non-family ones.
    Keywords: family business, patenting, innovation.
    Date: 2012–12
  6. By: Cremers, Katrin; Schliessler, Paula
    Abstract: This paper looks at the decision to settle patent litigation in Germany from a new angle by focusing on detailed data on within-trial actions and motivations by plain-tiff, defendant and the courts. Using a new dataset covering about 80% of all patent litigation cases in Germany between 2000 and 2008 we estimate the likelihood of within-trial settlement. We find that the within-trial settlement decision is to some degree driven by the proceedings that change the pre-trial setting of the negotiations in terms of information and stakes and make previously refused settlement a new option. Additionally, firm-specific stakes as measured by the relation of the involved parties to the disputed patent as well as firm-specific strategies are found to affect the general willingness to settle after the filing of a court case. The results suggest that pre-trial failure of settlement negotiations can to some extent be offset by within-trial settlement through efforts made by court and involved parties, but that the disposition to settle is to a larger degree determined by firm-specific stakes and strategies in the case. --
    Keywords: Patent,Patent Litigation,Settlement
    JEL: O34 K41
    Date: 2012
  7. By: Clément Bosquet (London School of Economics and Political Science (Spatial Economic Research Center), and Aix-Marseille University (Aix-Marseille School of Economics), CNRS, & EHESS.); Pierre-Philippe Combes (Aix-Marseille University (Aix-Marseille School of Economics), CNRS & EHESS.);
    Abstract: Thanks to a unique individual dataset of French academics in economics, we explain individual publication and citation records by gender and age, coauthorship patterns (average number of authors per article and size of the co-author network) and specialisation choices (percentage of output in each JEL code). The analysis is performed on both EconLit publication scores (adjusted for journal quality) and Google Scholar citation indexes, which allows us to present a broad picture of knowledge diffusion in economics. Citations are largely driven by publication records but also substantially increased by larger research team size and co-author networks.
    Keywords: economics of science, productivity determinants, knowledge diffusion, publication scores, citation indexes
    JEL: J24 O31 J45
    Date: 2012–10
  8. By: SUZUKI Shinya; Rene BELDERBOS; KWON Hyeog Ug; FUKAO Kyoji
    Abstract: We examine the impact of the strength of host countries' university research and university-industry collaboration on the propensity of Japanese multinational firms to conduct research and development (R&D) activities in these countries. We consider heterogeneous effects based on the type of R&D activity: basic research, applied research, and development for local markets and for global markets. Drawing on official survey data on R&D facilities of 498 Japanese multinational firms in 24 host countries, we find support for the notion that the strength of university research increases the probability that firms conduct R&D in a host country. Applied research activities are attracted to countries with relatively intensive university-industry collaboration. Moreover, firms from high-tech industries respond significantly more strongly to the presence of university research than those from low-tech industries.
    Date: 2012–12

This nep-ipr issue is ©2013 by Roland Kirstein. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.