Patent Publication and the Market for Ideas

References

• Allain M-L, Henry E, Kyle M (2016) Competition and the efficiency of markets for technology. Management Sci. 62(4):1000–1019.Link, Google Scholar
• Anton JJ, Yao DA (1994) Expropriation and inventions: Appropriable rents in the absence of property rights. Amer. Econom. Rev. 84(1):190–209.Google Scholar
• Anton JJ, Yao DA (2002) The sale of ideas: Strategic disclosure, property rights, and contracting. Rev. Econom. Stud. 69(3):513–531.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aoki R, Prusa T (1996) Product development and the timing of information disclosure under U.S. and Japanese patent systems. J. Japanese Internat. Econom. 10(3):233–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aoki R, Spiegel Y (2009) Pre-grant patent publication and cumulative innovation. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 27(3):333–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A (1995) Licensing tacit knowledge: Intellectual property rights and the market for know-how. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 4:41–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A (2010) Ideas for rent: An overview of markets for technology. Indust. Corporate Change 19(3):775–803.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A (2001) Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. Nelson R, ed. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 609–626.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bessen J (2005) Patents and the diffusion of technical information. Econom. Lett. 86(1):121–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhattacharya S, Ritter JR (1983) Innovation and communication: Signalling with partial disclosure. Rev. Econom. Stud. 50(2):331–346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Budish E, Roin B, Williams H (2015) Do firms underinvest in long-term research? Evidence from cancer clinical trials. Amer. Econom. Rev. 105(7):2044–2085.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Rassenfosse G, Palangkaraya A, Webster E (2013) Do patents shield disclosure or assure exclusivity when transacting technology? Melbourne Institute Working Paper 5/13, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elfenbein DW (2007) Publications, patents, and the market for university inventions. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 63(4):688–715.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallini NT (2002) The economics of patents: Lessons from recent U.S. patent reform. J. Econom. Perspect. 16(2):131–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallini NT, Wright BD (1990) Technology transfer under asymmetric information. RAND J. Econom. 21(1):147–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Stern S (2003) The product market and the market for ideas: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res. Policy 32(2):333–350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Hsu DH, Stern S (2008) The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: Evidence from patent grant delays. Management Sci. 54(5):982–997.Link, Google Scholar
• Graham S, Hegde D (2015) Disclosing patents’ secrets. Science 347(6219):236–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hegde D (2014) Tacit knowledge and the structure of patent licenses: Evidence from the biomedical industry. J. Econom. Management Strategy 23(3):568–600.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hellmann T (2007) Entrepreneurs and the process of obtaining resources. J. Econom. Management Strategy 16(1):81–109.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen RA, Thursby MC (2001) Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91(1):240–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson DKN, Popp D (2003) Forced out of the closet: The impact of the American Inventor’s Protection Act on the timing of patent disclosure. RAND J. Econom. 34(1):96–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamoreaux NR, Sokoloff KL (1996) Long-term change in the organization of inventive activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93(23):12686–12692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamoreaux NR, Sokoloff KL (2002) Intermediaries in the U.S. market for technology, 1870–1920. NBER Working Paper 9017, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Malmendier U (2010) Contractibility and the design of research agreements. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(1):214–246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Merges RP (1998) The control of strategic alliances: An empirical analysis of biotechnology collaborations. J. Indust. Organ. 46(2):125–156.Google Scholar
• Long C (2002) Patent signals. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 69(2):625–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luo H (2014) When to sell your idea: Theory and evidence from the movie industry. Management Sci. 60(12):3067–3086.Link, Google Scholar
• Merges PR (2005) A transactional view of property rights. Berkeley Tech. Law J. 20:1477–1520.Google Scholar
• Modigliani Fet al. (1999) An open letter to the U.S. Senate. http://www.eagleforum.org/patent/nobel_letter.html.Google Scholar
• Putnam J (1997) The value of international patent rights. Mimeo, Charles River Associates, Boston.Google Scholar
• Ragusa PA (1992) Eighteen months to publication: Should the United States join Europe and Japan by promptly publishing patent applications? George Washington J. Internat. Law Econom. 26(1):143–180.Google Scholar
• Rosenberg PD (2002) Patent Law Fundamentals, 2nd ed. (Clark Boardman Callaghan, New York).Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15(6):285–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tepperman A (2002) Do priority and disclosure rules matter? Canadian evidence from the 1989 patent reforms. Mimeo, Charles River Associates, Boston.Google Scholar
• Wakeman S (2012) How does obtaining intellectual property rights impact technology commercialization strategy for start-up innovators? Reconciling the effects on licensing and financing. ESMT Working Paper 12-03 (R1), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, Berlin.Google Scholar