When Do Firms Trade Patents?

References

• Afuah A (2002) Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: The case of cholesterol drugs. Strategic Management J. 23(2):171–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):425–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Katila R (2004) Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management J. 25(8‐9):887–907.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Lampert CM, Tandon V (2013) Paradigm-changing vs. paradigm-deepening innovation: How firm scope influences firm technological response to shocks. Organ. Sci. 25(3):653–669.Link, Google Scholar
• Akcigit U, Celik MA, Greenwood J (2016) Buy, keep, or sell: Economic growth and the market for ideas. Econometrica 84(3):943–984.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anand BN, Khanna T (2000) The structure of licensing contracts. J. Indust. Econom. 48(1):103–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L (1999) Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge (Kluwer, Norwell, MA).Google Scholar
• Arora A, Ceccagnoli M (2006) Patent protection, complementary assets, and firms’ incentives for technology licensing. Management Sci. 52(2):293–308.Link, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A (1998) Evolution of industry structure in the chemical industry. Arora A, Landau R, Rosenberg N, eds. Dynamics of Long-Run Growth in the Chemical Industry (Wiley, New York), 379–413.Google Scholar
• Arora A, Gambardella A (2010) The market for technology. Hall BH, Rosenberg N, eds. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 641–678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A, Belenzon S, Patacconi A (2018) The decline of science in corporate R&D. Strategic Management J. 39(1):3–32.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
• Baum JA, Korn HJ (1996) Competitive dynamics of interfirm rivalry. Acad. Management J. 39(2):255–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bessen J (2010) Name standardization routines. NBER Patent Data Project (March 24), accessed May 10, 2021, https://sites.google.com/site/patentdataproject/Home/posts/namestandardizationroutinesuploaded.Google Scholar
• Bessen J, Meurer MJ (2008) Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Schankerman M, van Reenen J (2013) Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry. Econometrica 81(4):1347–1393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Branstetter LG, Fisman R, Foley CF (2006) Do stronger intellectual property rights increase international technology transfer? Empirical evidence from U.S. firm-level panel data. Quart. J. Econom. 121(1):321–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ (1996) Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Acad. Management Rev. 21(1):100–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J. Law Econom. 3:1–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper No. 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
• Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Taylor & Francis, London).Google Scholar
• Degnan SA (1998) The licensing payoff from U.S. R&D. J. Licensing Executives Soc. Internat. 33(4):1–8.Google Scholar
• Figueroa N, Serrano CJ (2019) Patent trading flows of small and large firms. Res. Policy 48(7):1601–1616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Funk RJ (2014) Making the most of where you are: Geography, networks, and innovation in organizations. Acad. Management J. 57(1):193–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galasso A, Schankerman M (2010) Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation. RAND J. Econom. 41(3):472–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galasso A, Schankerman M, Serrano CJ (2013) Trading and enforcing patent rights. RAND J. Econom. 44(2):275–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Stern S (2000) Incumbency and R&D incentives: Licensing the gale of creative destruction. J. Econom. Management Strategy 9(4):485–511.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, Stern S (2010) Is there a market for ideas? Indust. Corporate Change 19(3):805–837.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman SJ, Hart OD (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. J. Political Econom. 94(4):691–719.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R (1995) Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Acad. Management J. 38(1):85–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Ziedonis RH (2001) The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND J. Econom. 32(1):101–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econom. 36(1):16–38.Google Scholar
• Harhoff D, Scherer F, Vopel K (2003) Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Res. Policy 32(8):1343–1363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hines JR (1999) Lessons from behavioral responses to international taxation. Natl. Tax J. 52(2):305–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochberg YV, Serrano CJ, Ziedonis RH (2018) Patent collateral, investor commitment, and the market for venture lending. J. Financial Econom. 130(1):74–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R (1993) Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quart. J. Econom. 108(3):577–598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kennedy D (1981) Cost-benefit analysis of entitlement problems: A critique. Stanford Law Rev. 33(3):387–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khanna R, Guler I, Nerkar A (2018) Entangled decisions: Knowledge interdependencies and terminations of patented inventions in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management J. 39(9):2439–2465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King G, Zeng L (2001) Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Anal. 9(2):137–163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kumar P, Zaheer A (2019) Ego-network stability and innovation in alliances. Acad. Management J. 62(3):691–716.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemley M, Shapiro C (2007) Patent hold-up and royalty stacking. Texas Law Rev. 85:1991–2049.Google Scholar
• Levin RC (1982) The semiconductor industry. Nelson RR, ed. Government and Technical Progress: A Cross-Industry Analysis (Pergamon Press, New York), 9–100.Google Scholar
• Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter SG (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Pap. Econom. Act. 1987(3):783–831.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. 14(2):95–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li J, Netessine S (2020) Higher market thickness reduces matching rate in online platforms: Evidence from a quasiexperiment. Management Sci. 66(1):271–289.Link, Google Scholar
• Li J, Wu D (2020) Do corporate social responsibility engagements lead to real environmental, social, and governance impact? Management Sci. 66(6):2564–2588.Link, Google Scholar
• Lieberman MB, Montgomery DB (1998) First-mover (dis)advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management J. 19(12):1111–1125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ouellette LL (2010) How many patents does it take to make a drug-follow-on pharmaceutical patents and university licensing. Michigan Telecommun. Tech. Law Rev. 17(1):299–336.Google Scholar
• Ozmel U, Reuer JJ, Wu CW (2017) Interorganizational imitation and acquisitions of high‐tech ventures. Strategic Management J. 38(13):2647–2665.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phelps M (2018) How to build startup muscle fast: Buy patents! Forbes (March 27), https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallphelps/2018/03/27/how-to-build-startup-muscle-fast/#12d214f22364.Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Stuart TE, Hannan MT (1996) Networks, knowledge, and niches: Competition in the worldwide semiconductor industry, 1984-1991. Amer. J. Sociol. 102(3):659–689.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roijakkers N, Hagedoorn J, van Kranenburg H (2005) Dual market structures and the likelihood of repeated ties–evidence from pharmaceutical biotechnology. Res. Policy 34(2):235–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rumelt RP, Schendel D, Teece DJ (1991) Strategic management and economics. Strategic Management J. 12(2):5–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sampson RC (2007) R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Acad. Management J. 50(2):364–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1961) Theory of Economic Development (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Serrano CJ (2010) The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents. RAND J. Econom. 41(4):686–708.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Serrano CJ (2018) Estimating the gains from trade in the market for patent rights. Internat. Econom. Rev. 59(4):1877–1904.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Serrano CJ, Ziedonis RH (2018) The redeployability of patent assets: Evidence from failed start-ups. NBER Working Paper No. 24526, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Stuart TE (2001) Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital investments. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(6):1546–1588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sternitzke C (2013) An exploratory analysis of patent fencing in pharmaceuticals: The case of PDE5 inhibitors. Res. Policy 42(2):542–551.Crossref, 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
• Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. 18(7):509–533.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ugur M, Trushin E, Solomon E, Guidi F (2016) R&D and productivity in OECD firms and industries: A hierarchical meta-regression analysis. Res. Policy 45(10):2069–2086.Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) (2017) Drug Industry: Profits, Research and Development Spending, and Merger and Acquisition Deals (U.S. GAO, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Vasudeva G, Zaheer A, Hernandez E (2012) The embeddedness of networks: Institutions, structural holes, and innovativeness in the fuel cell industry. Organ. Sci. 24(3):645–663.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang HC, He J, Mahoney JT (2009) Firm‐specific knowledge resources and competitive advantage: The roles of economic‐and relationship‐based employee governance mechanisms. Strategic Management J. 30(12):1265–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiersema MF, Bowen HP (2009) The use of limited dependent variable techniques in strategy research: Issues and methods. Strategic Management J. 30(6):679–692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yan Y, Dong JQ, Faems D (2020) Not every coopetitor is the same: The impact of technological, market and geographical overlap with coopetitors on firms’ breakthrough inventions. Long Range Plann. 53(1):101–873.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yayavaram S, Srivastava MK, Sarkar MB (2018) Role of search for domain knowledge and architectural knowledge in alliance partner selection. Strategic Management J. 39(8):2277–2302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ziedonis RH (2004) Don’t fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Sci. 50(6):804–820.Link, Google Scholar