nep-ipr New Economics Papers
on Intellectual Property Rights
Issue of 2013‒06‒04
seventeen papers chosen by
Giovanni Ramello
Universita' Amedeo Avogadro

  1. Optimal pricing and quality of academic journals and the ambiguous welfare effects of forced open access: A two-sided model By Mueller-Langer, F.; Watt, R.
  2. International patenting strategies in ICT. By Giuditta De Prato; Daniel Nepelski
  3. University Knowledge, Originality of Patents and the Creation of New Industries By Guerzoni, Marco; Aldridge, Taylor; Audretsch, David B; Sameeksha, Desai
  4. Does the Patent Cooperation Treaty work? A global analysis of patent applications by non-residents. By Daniel Nepelski; Giuditta De Prato
  5. The ownership of academic patents and their impact. Evidence from five European countries By Lissoni, Francesco; Montobbio, Fabio
  6. The Shapley value as a guide to FRAND licensing agreements By DEHEZ, Pierre; POUKENS, SOPHIE
  7. Patenting in Rural America: Inventors, Teams, and Technologies By Toole, Andrew; Low, Sarah
  8. The Importance (or not) of Patents to UK Firms By Bronwyn H. Hall; Christian Helmers; Mark Rogers; Vania Sena
  9. Inventorship and authorship as attribution rights: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit By Lissoni, Francesco; Fabio, Montobbio
  10. The role of early career factors in academic patenting By Lawson Cornelia; Sterzi Valerio
  11. Institutions, competition and regulation: Intellectual property and innovation By Tucker, C.E.
  12. The globalization of technology in emerging markets: a gravity model on the determinants of international patent collaborations By Montobbio Fabio; Sterzi Valerio
  13. Are joint patents collusive? Evidence from the US and Europe By Fosfuri, A.; Helmers, C.; Roux, C.
  14. International technology transfer between China and the rest of the world. By Giuditta De Prato; Daniel Nepelski
  15. Of TRIPS and Traps: The Interpretative Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the EU over Patent Law By Dimopoulos, A.; Vantsiouri, P.
  16. Royalty Rate Determination By Peter Dawson
  17. Compulsory licensing: the foundations of an institutional innovation By Antonelli Cristiano

  1. By: Mueller-Langer, F.; Watt, R. (Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economics Center)
    Date: 2012
  2. By: Giuditta De Prato (European Commission – JRC - IPTS); Daniel Nepelski (European Commission – JRC - IPTS)
    Abstract: We study the drivers of international patent applications in ICT technologies by non-residents. We construct bilateral measures of foreign patent applications for all countries active as both a source of patents and a destination of applications filed between 1990 and 2007 to any patent office in the world. Despite the global character of the ICT industry, applicants from different regions follow different patenting strategies, only Japanese and US applicants are exceptionally active in seeking for patent protection in the majority of world markets. Applying a gravity model to explain the determinants of seeking patent protection in foreign markets, we find that economic and inventive capacity of a country attracts foreign patent applications.
    Keywords: IPR protection, patenting strategies, international patenting, ICT, gravity model
    JEL: D8 F2 O30 O31 O57
    Date: 2012–06
  3. By: Guerzoni, Marco; Aldridge, Taylor; Audretsch, David B; Sameeksha, Desai (University of Turin)
    Abstract: Scientific breakthroughs emanating from universities can be a trigger for the emergence of new industries such as in the paradigmatic case of biotechnology. Obviously, not all research conducted in the universities leads to radical departure from the existing technological trajectories. When a patent protection is granted to a discovery, it is possible to construct a proxy for the originality of the discovery based on patent citations. Patent originality has been long recognized in fostering the emergence of new technologies and industries. However, while a large body of literature exists measuring the impact of patent originality on a broad range of measures of firm performance, this paper aims at investigating the conditions driving patent originality. In particular, in providing the first empirical examination of the determinants of patent originality, this paper finds that the research context, as reflected by the funding source for the scientist, influences the extent to which intellectual property protected by a patent is original. Eventually, we propose that university scientists funded by their university, which has a more fundamental mission, have a higher propensity to generate patents that are more original. By contrast, university scientists funded either by industry or other non-university organizations have a lower propensity to generate more original patents.
    Date: 2012–12
  4. By: Daniel Nepelski (European Commission – JRC - IPTS); Giuditta De Prato (European Commission – JRC - IPTS)
    Abstract: We study drivers of international patent applications by non-residents and assess the importance of the PCT membership in their motivations. We construct bilateral measures of foreign patent applications for all countries active as both a source of patents and a destination of applications filed between 1970 and 2009. The data used originates from the EPO Patstat database. Applying a gravity model to explain the determinants of seeking patent protection in foreign markets, we find that there is a negative relationship between PCT membership and a country's attractiveness for foreign applicants. It is mainly the size of the market and a country's inventive capacity that attract foreign applicants to seek for patent protection in foreign countries.
    Keywords: patent harmonization, PCT, IPR, patenting strategies, international patenting, technology transfer
    JEL: F2 O30 O31 O57
    Date: 2012–06
  5. By: Lissoni, Francesco; Montobbio, Fabio (University of Turin)
    Abstract: This paper compares the value and impact of academic patents in five different European countries with different institutional frameworks: Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Sweden. Ownership patterns of academic patents are found to: (i) differ greatly across country, due to a combination of legal norms on IP and institutional features of the university system; (ii) be strongly associated to academic patents' value, as measured by patent citations. Company-owned academic patents tend to be as cited as non-academic ones, while university-owned tend to be less cited. Academic patents in the Netherlands are more cited than non-academic ones, irrespective to their ownership, while university-owned patents get fewer citations in both France and Italy. We propose an explanation of these results based on the different autonomy and experience in dealing with IP and technology transfer enjoyed by universities in the countries considered. We also find that company-owned academic patents in Sweden get many fewer citations than non-academic. Individually-owned academic patents are more cited than non-academic patents similarly owned by their inventors.
    Date: 2012–12
  6. By: DEHEZ, Pierre (Université catholique de Louvain, CORE, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium); POUKENS, SOPHIE (Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium)
    Abstract: We consider the problem of specifying Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory agreements faced by standard-setting organizations. Along with Layne-Farrar, Padilla and Schmalensee (2007), we model the problem as a cooperative game with transferable utility, allowing for patents to be weak in the sense that they have substitutes. Assuming that a value has been assigned to weak patents, we obtain a formula for the Shapley value that gives an insight into what FRAND agreements should look like.
    Keywords: patent licensing, Shapley value, core
    Date: 2013–05–06
  7. By: Toole, Andrew; Low, Sarah
    Keywords: patent, regional development, inventors, Community/Rural/Urban Development, R11,
    Date: 2013
  8. By: Bronwyn H. Hall; Christian Helmers; Mark Rogers; Vania Sena
    Abstract: A surprisingly small number of innovative firms use the patent system. In the UK, the share of firms patenting among those reporting that they have innovated is about 4%. Survey data from the same firms support the idea that they do not consider patents or other forms of registered IP as important as informal IP for protecting inventions. We show that there are a number of explanations for these findings: most firms are SMEs, many innovations are new to the firm, but not to the market, and many sectors are not patent active. We find evidence pointing to a positive association between patenting and innovative performance measured as turnover due to innovation, but not between patenting and subsequent employment growth. The analysis relies on a new integrated dataset for the UK that combines a range of data sources into a panel at the enterprise level.
    JEL: L21 L25 O34
    Date: 2013–05
  9. By: Lissoni, Francesco; Fabio, Montobbio (University of Turin)
    Abstract: Authorship and inventorship contribute to the reputation of individual scientists and are 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 compare the social and legal norms that affect the negotiation over the distribution of authorship and inventorship. We use text-mining techniques to identify 680 "patent-publication pairs" (related sets of patents and publications), for a sample of Italian academic scientists. On average, the number of co-authors 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. However, the probability of exclusion also declines with seniority, as expected from social norms. Women have a significant higher probability to be excluded, other things being equal. Long-lasting doubts on the reliability of authorship as a tool for allocating scientific credit are reinforced, and can be extended to inventorship. Results for attribution rights in science, as we obtain here, raise questions and provide insights on other settings in which attribution rights are both relevant and distributed within teams.
    Date: 2012–12
  10. By: Lawson Cornelia; Sterzi Valerio (University of Turin)
    Abstract: This paper explores the characteristics of persistent academic inventors and how they are influenced by their personal attributes, PhD institution, and first invention. Using a novel dataset on 555 UK academic inventors, we find that the quality of the first invention is the best predictor for subsequent participation in the patenting process. We further find evidence for a positive training effect whereby researchers that were trained at universities that had already established commercialisation units have a higher propensity to patent persistently. In addition, researchers that gained first patenting experience in industry are able to benefit from stronger knowledge flows and receive more citations than their purely academic peers.
    Date: 2012–01
  11. By: Tucker, C.E. (Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economics Center)
    Date: 2012
  12. By: Montobbio Fabio; Sterzi Valerio (University of Turin)
    Abstract: This paper analyzes the determinants of different types of international technological collaborations among patents’ inventors between emerging and advanced countries. Technological collaborations generate knowledge flows between inventors through interpersonal and face to face contacts. We use US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent applications for a panel of eleven emerging economies and seven advanced countries (1990-2004) and a novel database that exploits information on companies’ country of origin. We estimate the impact of geographical distance and various economic and institutional variables using the Poisson pseudomaximum likelihood (PPML) and show that results vary according to the type of collaborations considered and to the country of origin (emerging vs. advanced) of the companies involved. Geographical distance affects international technological collaborations only when the applicant’s ownership is in the emerging country. Fixed effect estimates show that stronger IPRs positively affect international technological collaborations only when stemming from subsidiaries of multinational firms.
    Date: 2012–02
  13. By: Fosfuri, A.; Helmers, C.; Roux, C. (Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economics Center)
    Date: 2012
  14. By: Giuditta De Prato (European Commission – JRC - IPTS); Daniel Nepelski (European Commission – JRC - IPTS)
    Abstract: We study the patterns and drivers of international technology transfer to and from China and the rest of the world. Our analysis makes use of patent-based measures of cross-border ownership of inventions. To quantify these technology flows, we a patent database providing a worldwide coverage of patents. We use a gravity model to explain the drivers of the international technology transfer. Although China exhibits a large deficit in international technology transfer, the flow of technology from abroad to China intensifies as its absorptive capacity grows. Excluding Taiwan, the US and China relationship dominates the technology transfer between China and the rest of the world. This is even more emphasised by the relatively weak position of Japan and other Asian countries in the process of technology exchange with China. This is result is not affected by the fact that the US acts mainly as an acquirer of Chinese technology.
    Keywords: international technology transfer, cross-border ownership of inventions, patent analysis, China
    JEL: D8 F23 O14 O30 O57
    Date: 2012–07
  15. By: Dimopoulos, A.; Vantsiouri, P. (Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economics Center)
    Date: 2012
  16. By: Peter Dawson
    Abstract: Courts require royalty rate calculations based on rigorous economic foundations. The licensing literature provides limited guidance for royalty rate determination, leaving appraisal report readers wanting a more tangible and objective lens through which to understand and judge the credibility of royalty rate analyses. This paper develops the standard, core model for calculating market royalty rates for intangible asset licenses where royalty rates are determined ex ante in the actual market, or ex post in a hypothetical market under a market value standard. The model forms a consistent basis for performing and evaluating licensing royalty appraisals. Not being distracted with the question of how to combine the input values when calculating a royalty rate, the court can focus on understanding and verifying an appraiser’s calculations of the input variable values.
    Keywords: royalty rate, licensing, intangible asset, intellectual property rights, technology, valuation, bargaining range, royalty base, Georgia Pacific factors
    JEL: D00 D40 D45 D46 D82 D86 K00 K34 L24 M20 O34
    Date: 2013–03
  17. By: Antonelli Cristiano (University of Turin)
    Abstract: Compulsory licensing is an important institutional innovation that improves the knowledge governance and can help fostering the pace of generation of technological knowledge and the rate of introduction of technological innovations. Recent advances in the economics of knowledge have confirmed the medieval wisdom according to which to make knowledge it is necessary to stand on giants’ shoulders. The generation of new technological knowledge is possible only if the stock of existing knowledge can be used as an input. All barriers and delays in the access to existing knowledge risk to reducing the capability to generate new technological knowledge. Intellectual property right regimes based upon exclusivity may increase the incentives to generate new technological knowledge but reduce the efficiency and the actual viability of the knowledge generation process. The costs of the reduction in the access to existing knowledge are larger the larger the scope of application of new technology. Compulsory licensing for technological knowledge can increase the rate of generation of new technological knowledge. The paper contributes the debate with a simple model that enables to identify the correct levels of royalties for compulsory licensing in both product and knowledge markets.
    Date: 2012–02

This nep-ipr issue is ©2013 by Giovanni Ramello. 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.