The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays

References

• Abbring J. H., van den Berg G. J. The nonparametric identification of treatment effects in duration models. Econometrica (2003) 71:1491–1518Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P., Tirole J. The management of innovation. Quart. J. Econom. (1994) 109:1185–1210Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anand B., Khanna T. The structure of licensing contracts. J. Indust. Econom. (2000) 48:103–135Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anton J. J., Yao D. A. Expropriation and inventions: Appropriable rents in the absence of property rights. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1994) 84:190–209Google Scholar
• Arora A. Licensing tacit knowledge: Intellectual property rights and the market for know-how. Econom. Innovation New Tech. (1995) 4:41–49Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A., Ceccagnoli M., Cohen W. M. R&D and the patent premium. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2008) . ForthcomingCrossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A., Fosfuri A., Gambardella A.Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K. J., Nelson R. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (1962) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 609–625Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ausubel L., Cramton P., Deneckere R. J., Aumann R., Hart S. Bargaining with incomplete information. Handbook of Game Theory (2002) 3(North-Holland, Amsterdam) . Chap. 50Google Scholar
• Beggs A. W. The licensing of patents under asymmetric information. Internat. J. Indust. Organ (1992) 10:171–191Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W. M., Merrill S. A.Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy (2003) (National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.) Google Scholar
• Dechenaux E., Goldfarb B., Shane S. A., Thursby M. C. Appropriability and commercialization: Evidence from MIT inventions. Management Sci. (2008) 54(5):893–906Link, Google Scholar
• Elfenbein D. Publications, patents and the market for university inventions. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2007) 63:688–715Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farrell J., Shapiro C. How strong are weak patents? Amer. Econom. Rev. (2008) . ForthcomingCrossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L., Sorenson O. Science as a map in technological research. Strategic Management J. (2004) 25:909–928Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans J. S., Stern S. Incumbency and R&D incentives: Licensing the gale of creative destruction. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2000) 9:485–511Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans J. S., Hsu D. H., Stern S. When does start-up innovation spur the gale of creative destruction? RAND J. Econom. (2002) 33:571–586Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gittelman M., Kogut B. Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logic of citation patterns. Management Sci. (2003) 49:366–382Link, Google Scholar
• Giuri P., Mariani M., Brusoni S., Crespi G., Francoz D., Gambardella A., Garcia-Fontes W., Geuna A., Gonzales R., Harhoff D., Hoisl K., Lebas C., Luzzi A., Magazzini L., Nesta L., Nomaler O., Palomeras N., Patel P., Romanelli M., Verspagen B. Inventors and invention processes in Europe. Results from the PatVal-EU survey. Res. Policy (2007) 36:1107–1127Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham S. J. H., Harhoff D. Can post-grant reviews improve patent system design? A twin study of US and European patents. (2006) . CEPR Discussion Paper 5680, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
• Graham S. J. H., Mowery D., Cohen W. M., Merrill S. L. Intellectual property protection in the U.S. software industry. Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy (2003) (National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.) 219–281Google Scholar
• Hall B. H., MacGarvie M. The private value of software patents. (2006) . NBER Working Paper 12195, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B. H., Jaffe A. B., Trajtenberg M. The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. (2001) . NBER Working Paper 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D., Wagner S. Modelling the duration of patent examination at the European patent office. (2005) . Working Paper 5283, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
• Heller M., Eisenberg R. Can patents deter innovation? The anti-commons in biomedical research. Science (1998) 280:698–701Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hellmann T. The role of patents for bridging the science to market gap. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (2007) 63:624–657Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu D. Venture capitalists and cooperative start-up commercialization strategy. Management Sci. (2006) 52:204–219Link, Google Scholar
• Jaffe A., Lerner J.Innovation and Its Discontents (2004) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Google Scholar
• Johnson D. K. N., Popp D. Forced out of the closet: The impact of the American inventors protection act on the timing of patent disclosure. RAND J. Econom. (2003) 34:96–112Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R., Mang P. Y. Exploiting technological opportunities: The timing of collaborations. Res. Policy (2003) 32:317–332Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kitch E. The nature and function of the patent system. J. Law Econom. (1977) 20:265–290Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamoreaux N. R., Sokoloff K. L. Long-term change in the organization of inventive activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (1996) 93:12686–12692Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lancaster T.The Econometric Analysis of Transition Data (1990) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lanjouw J. O., Schankerman M. Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. RAND J. Econom. (2001) 32:129–151Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lanjouw J. O., Schankerman M. Patent quality and research productivity: Measuring innovation with multiple indicators. Econom. J. (2004) 114:441–465Google Scholar
• Lemley M. A., Shapiro C. Probabilistic patents. J. Econom. Perspect. (2005) 19:75–98Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J., Merges R. The control of technology alliances: An empirical analysis of the biotechnology industry. J. Indust. Econom. (1998) 46:125–156Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J., Zhu F. What is the impact of software patent shifts? Evidence from Lotus v. Borland. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2007) 25:511–529Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowe R. A. Knowledge transfer and university entrepreneurship. (2004) . Mimeo, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
• Markewicz K. R. University patenting and the rate of knowledge exploitation. (2005) . Working paper, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
• Narin F. Patent bibliometrics. Scientometrics (1994) 30:147–155Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R., Merges R. On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Rev. (1990) 90:839–916Crossref, Google Scholar
• Popp D., Juhl T., Johnson D. Time in purgatory: Determinants of the grant lag for U.S. patent applications. Topics Econom. Anal. Policy (2004) 4(1). Article 29Google Scholar
• Quillen C. D., Webster O. H. Continuing patent applications and performance of the U.S. patent office. Federal Circuit Bar J. (2001) 11:1–21Google Scholar
• Saxenian A.Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (1994) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Scherer F. M., Harhoff D. Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes. Res. Policy (2000) 29:559–566Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scotchmer S.Innovation and Incentives (2004) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Shapiro C., Jaffe A. B., Lerner J., Stern S. Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting. Innovation Policy and the Economy (2001) 1(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) 119–150Google Scholar
• Teece D. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy (1986) 15:285–305Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thursby M., Thursby J., Dechenaux E. Shirking, sharing risk, and shelving: The role of university license contracts. (2007) . NBER Working Paper 11128, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• van den Berg G. J., Heckman J. J., Leamer E. Duration models: Specification, identification, and multiple durations. Handbook of Econometrics (2001) V(North-Holland, Amsterdam) 3381–3460Google Scholar