nep-ipr New Economics Papers
on Intellectual Property Rights
Issue of 2017‒11‒12
eight papers chosen by
Giovanni Ramello
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro”

  1. Subsidized and non-subsidized R&D projects: Do they differ? By Koehler, Mila; Peters, Bettina
  2. The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions By Ugo Rizzo; Nicolò Barbieri; Laura Ramaciotti; Demian Iannantuono
  3. Patent Breadth in an International Setting By Eric Bond; Benjamin Zissimos
  4. Taxing Intellectual Property in the Global Economy: A Plea for Regulated and Internationally Coordinated Profit Splitting By Wolfram F. Richter
  5. Brand wars in cyberspace: a GIS solution By Jakobi, Ákos; Lőcsei, Hajnalka
  6. Can IPR Affect MNE’s Entry Modes? The Chilean Case By Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza; Luis Castro Peñarrieta
  7. Unlocking Investment in Intangible Assets By Anna Thum-Thysen; Peter Voigt; Benat Bilbao-Osorio; Christoph Maier; Diana Ognyanova
  8. Vertical Licensing, Input Pricing, and Entry By Elpiniki Bakaouka; Chrysovalantou Milliou

  1. By: Koehler, Mila; Peters, Bettina
    Abstract: Little is known about whether and to what extent the outcome of subsidized and non-subsidized R&D projects differ. In this paper we exploit a novel dataset of patent applications filed in Germany between 1995-2005, which allows us to identify if a patent application stems from a subsidized project or not. We use a variety of patent indicators to elucidate to what extent successful subsidized and non-subsidized R&D projects within the same firm differ. Results show that patent applications from subsidized R&D projects have a higher private value, are more often co-applied, more general, but less original, and have larger inventor teams when compared to all other patent applications filed by the same firms. These differences seem to reflect that thematic R&D programs aim to support collaborative R&D projects that have an immediate economic utilization of results.
    Keywords: R&D,subsidies,patents,evaluation,project-level analysis,within firm comparison
    JEL: H25 H50 O31 O34 O38
    Date: 2017
  2. By: Ugo Rizzo (Department of Economics and Management, University of Ferrara, Italy); Nicolò Barbieri (Department of Economics and Management, University of Ferrara, Italy); Laura Ramaciotti (Department of Economics and Management, University of Ferrara, Italy); Demian Iannantuono (Department of Economics, University of Parma, Italy)
    Abstract: The paper investigates the relationship between radical technological development and public research. This study draws on the theory of recombinant innovation, and builds on two newly developed indicators of radicalness (Verhoeven et al., 2016) to analyse UK patents filed at the European Patent Office. It assesses whether the proximity of the invention to public research is related to a higher probability of the invention being radical. The results show that, depending on the type of novelty embodied by the radical invention (novelty in recombinant rather than novelty in technological origin), different forms of public research relate to the radicalness of invention in different ways. We found also that these relationships are heterogeneous across technological sectors. Policy implications are derived.
    Keywords: Radical invention, novelty, patent, recombination, public research
    JEL: O30 O31 O34
    Date: 2017–11
  3. By: Eric Bond; Benjamin Zissimos
    Abstract: We examine the Nash equilibria of a game where two national governments set patent breadth strategically. Broader patents make R&D more attractive, but the effect on static efficiency is nonmonotonic. In a North.South model, where only the North can innovate, harmonization of patent breadth lowers welfare relative to the Nash equilibrium. When both countries can innovate, harmonization toward narrower patent breadth may raise world welfare.
    Keywords: coordination, innovation, patent breadth, patent race, R&D
    JEL: F02 F13 O30 O31 O32
    Date: 2017
  4. By: Wolfram F. Richter
    Abstract: Inter-country equity in the taxation of IP is a contentious issue. With its BEPS initiative, the OECD aims at taxing in accordance with value creation even though there are admitted difficulties in determining the actual place of value creation. The European Commission promotes the introduction of unitary taxation. The proposal’s drawback is that it lacks incentive compatibility in information exchange. Furthermore, it stipulates a cost-dependent apportionment of the common consolidated corporate tax base that incentivizes locating R&D in low-tax countries. Against this background, this paper makes a case for an internationally regulated split of the profit earned with imported IP.
    Keywords: intellectual property, tax competition, profit split, formulary apportionment, Shapley value
    JEL: H25 O34 M48 F23
    Date: 2017
  5. By: Jakobi, Ákos; Lőcsei, Hajnalka
    Abstract: In the first sight, it seems to be obvious that Nike, the well-known US sports equipment company, is predominant in Great Britain; however, the European (German) giant, Adidas also happens to be very popular in the country. The duel between the global first and second sportswear companies can be traced back to not just their sales numbers in a bid to gain larger market share, but also to soft factors, such as reputation. The only problem is that reputation can be at best measured by well-organized questionnaire data of population samples, which are sometimes difficult to administer. However, this issue can be also solved by capturing the presence of indirect knowledge about the brands, for example, from the geographically localizable content of cyberspace. The indirect application of digital footprints in scientific analyses has notable examples, in which the conclusions are based on the examination of digital data that have been generated as by-products of socio-economic phenomena.
    Keywords: Brand, cyberspace, GIS
    JEL: L67 R11 R12
    Date: 2017–02
  6. By: Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza; Luis Castro Peñarrieta
    Abstract: This paper analyzes the effect of stronger Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) on the entry modes chosen by MNEs in the Chilean market. MNEs can choose between exporting, introducing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and licensing to a domestic firm in Chile. We use plant-level data for the 2001–2007 and exploite the exogenous reform of IPR in Chile in 2005 to examine the effect of the change in IPR on the overall foreign presence in Chile, controlling for the activities of industries where high levels of technology transfer and imitation are important factors. The main results show that stronger IPR change the mode of entry chosen by MNEs. In this case, FDI is replaced by licensing. This is explained by Chile’s high absorptive capacity during this period. Moreover, we test whether this effect differs across high-tech and low-tech industries and conclude that the displacement of FDI is less severe in high-tech industries.
    Keywords: Technology Licensing, Productivity, Spillovers, Chile
    JEL: O34 O44 C5 K2
    Date: 2017–10–30
  7. By: Anna Thum-Thysen; Peter Voigt; Benat Bilbao-Osorio; Christoph Maier; Diana Ognyanova
    Abstract: Intangible assets are at the heart of what makes firms competitive. They are vital for productivity and economic growth. A key question is whether the factors that tend to hold back investments in Europe are the same for tangible and intangible assets, i.e. is there a need for specific policy measures addressing intangible assets? This paper provides contextual information concerning intangible assets by discussing conceptual aspects, illustrating recent trends in terms of investments in intangibles and their corresponding impact on productivity and Gross Value Added (GVA) growth. With a view at specific characteristics of intangibles, potential drivers and barriers to investments in intangibles are identified and tested. Evidence from the presented empirical analyses suggests that including intangibles in a source-ofgrowth framework changes the corresponding growth patterns (GVA tends to grow more rapidly and capital deepening becomes the dominant source of growth). Looking at intangibles also helps to improve the understanding of TFP differentials. As regards investments, structural factors tend to matter generally more for intangibles whereas cyclical factors matter more for tangible assets. Against this backdrop, a series of policy-relevant messages has been derived. Overall, however, there is need to enlarge the general understanding of knowledge creation and to further improve the measurement of intangible assets in order to allow sound and evidence-based policy support.
    JEL: E01 E22 O34 O4
    Date: 2017–05
  8. By: Elpiniki Bakaouka; Chrysovalantou Milliou
    Abstract: We explore the incentives of a vertically integrated incumbent firm to license the production technology of its core input to an external firm, transforming the licensee into its input supplier. We find that the incumbent opts for licensing even when licensing also transforms the licensee into one of its direct competitors in the final products market. In fact, the licensee's entry into the final products market, although increases the competition and the cost that the licensor faces, it reinforces, instead of weakens, the licensing incentives. Furthermore, the licensee's entry augments the positive welfare implications of vertical licensing.
    Keywords: licensing, vertical relations, entry, two-part tariffs, outsourcing
    JEL: L22 L24 L13 L42 D45
    Date: 2017

This nep-ipr issue is ©2017 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.