|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
|
Issue of 2017‒10‒15
five papers chosen by Giovanni Ramello Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” |
| By: | Anderson, Robert D.; Kovacic, William E. |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the evolution of national competition (antitrust) policies and enforcement approaches vis-à-vis intellectual property rights (IPRs) and associated anti-competitive practices in major jurisdictions over the past several decades. It focuses especially on the underlying process of economic learning that has, the authors suggest, driven relevant policy changes. Part 2 of the paper outlines the breakthroughs in understanding that have underpinned the evolution of competition policy approaches toward intellectual property licensing arrangements in the US, Canada and the EU. Part 3 elaborates the foundational insights that have motivated competition policy interventions with respect to 'newer' issues such as anti-competitive patent settlements and hold-ups in relation to standard setting processes, in addition to the modern focus on mergers that potentially lessen incentives for innovation and on abuse of dominance/single firm exclusionary practices in IP-intensive network industries. Part 4 outlines some of the core policy concerns and insights driving the increased emphasis that leading competition authorities now devote to policy advocacy and research in relation to the scope and definition of IP rights. Overall, the analysis suggests, firstly, that competition policy applications in the intellectual property sphere are matters of fundamental importance for economic advancement and prosperity, having a direct bearing on innovation, growth and the diffusion of new technologies. Indeed, the roles of IP and competition policy are now sufficiently intertwined and interdependent that neither can be well understood or applied in an optimal fashion in the absence of the other. Secondly, the thought evolution described herein implies that successful policy applications require careful study of market structure and behaviour, not in the abstract but with reference to the particular markets affected. Thirdly, it augurs favourably for the prospects of continuing gradual and incremental convergence in national approaches in this area, even spanning developed and developing countries, on the basis of continual learning and informed self-interest. |
| Keywords: | intellectual property,patents,international trade and competition policy,antitrust,innovation,mergers,anti-competitive settlements,standards,network industries,competition advocacy |
| JEL: | K21 L4 L41 L43 O3 O34 |
| Date: | 2017 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:wtowps:ersd201713&r=ipr |
| By: | Buzard, Kristy (Syracuse University); Carlino, Gerald A. (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia); Hunt, Robert M. (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia); Carr, Jake (The Ohio State University); Smith, Tony E. (University of Pennsylvania) |
| Abstract: | Patent citations are a commonly used indicator of knowledge spillovers among inventors, while clusters of research and development labs are locations in which knowledge spillovers are particularly likely to occur. In this paper, we assign patents and citations to newly defined clusters of American R&D labs to capture the geographic extent of knowledge spillovers. Our tests show that the localization of knowledge spillovers, as measured via patent citations, is strongest at small spatial scales and diminishes rapidly with distance. On average, patents within a cluster are about three to six times more likely to cite an inventor in the same cluster than one in a control group. At the same time, the strength of knowledge spillovers varies widely between clusters. The results are robust to the specification of patent technological categories, the method of citation matching and alternate cluster definitions. |
| Keywords: | spatial clustering; geographic concentration; R&D labs; localized knowledge spillovers; patent citations |
| JEL: | O31 R12 |
| Date: | 2017–10–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedpwp:17-32&r=ipr |
| By: | Taro Daiko (OECD); Hélène Dernis (OECD); Mafini Dosso (European Commission - JRC); Petros Gkotsis (European Commission - JRC); Mariagrazia Squicciarini (OECD); Alexander Tuebke (European Commission - JRC); Antonio Vezzani (European Commission - JRC) |
| Abstract: | The speed, scale and scope of the digital transformation and the widespread use of digital technologies in most aspects of our daily lives are changing the way we work, innovate, produce, interact and live. Knowledge flows almost instantaneously and digitalised information can be infinitely replicated, making the exploitation of knowledge a key factor for competitiveness. At the same time, changes at the local level may have global implications and innovation ecosystems become more and more global. These dynamics challenge policy making, and call for understanding the drivers of change, detecting trends in a timely fashion, and acting in a coordinated manner. The internet of things, digital manufacturing and 3D printing, industry 4.0 and big data are all components and drivers of the digital transformation, but the ways in which this new technological revolution will transform industries, countries and societies remain difficult to fully anticipate. As we become increasingly aware of the opportunities and the challenges of the digital economy, we also need to better understand how these technologies are forged and to identify the key players in such changes. The original data and statistics on the innovation output of the world's top corporate R&D investors presented in this report and its focus on digital technologies represent an important step towards this direction. It results from a long-term collaboration between the European Commission's Joint Research Centre and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and their joint efforts to provide up-to-date comparable data and state-of-the-art indicators and analysis. This report is directed at a number of stakeholders, including policy makers, industry representatives, practitioners and the scientific community. By exploiting information on patents, trademarks and designs, this work sheds light on the top R&D investors worldwide in the digital economy, their innovative and creative activities and their branding strategies. It is accompanied by a publicly available database that can be used for further analysis in support of evidence-based policy making. |
| Keywords: | Patent, Trademark, Design, Digital, IP bundle, Scoreboard, Top corporate R&D investors, Industrial |
| Date: | 2017–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc107015&r=ipr |
| By: | Andreas Reinstaller (WIFO); Peter Reschenhofer (WIFO) |
| Abstract: | This paper examines whether PageRank algorithms are a valid instrument for the analysis of technical progress in specific technological fields by means of patent citation data. It provides evidence for patent data in biotechnology. Recent literature has been critical with regard to the use of PageRank for the analysis of scientific citation networks. The results reported in this paper indicate, however, that with some minor adaptations and careful interpretation of the results the algorithm can be used to capture some important stylised facts of technical progress and the importance of single patents relatively well especially if compared to indicators based on direct inward citations only. |
| Keywords: | patent citations, technological progress, PageRank algorithm, biotechnology |
| Date: | 2017–10–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wfo:wpaper:y:2017:i:543&r=ipr |
| By: | Pechtl, Hans; Heidarian, Elham |
| Date: | 2016 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:grewdp:022016&r=ipr |