When means become ends: Considering the impact of patent strategy on innovation

Information Economics and Policy

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 135-158

  Macdonald, Stuart ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Innovation; Patent; Policy; Strategy

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS; PUBLIC POLICY;

ECONOMISTS; INNOVATION;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

INNOVATION; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; POLICY STRATEGY; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

EID: 1842534842     PISSN: 01676245     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2003.09.008     Document Type: Article

References (119)

1. Abrahamson E. Management fashion Academy of Management Review 21 1 1996 254-285
2. ACARD, 1980. Exploiting Invention. Report to the Prime Minister, London, December
3. Afuah A. Strategies to turn adversity into profits Sloan Management Review Winter 1999 99-110
4. Aharonian, G., 2001. Why all business methods achieve a technical effect, October. Available from http://www.bustpatents.com/aharonian/technical.htm (accessed 20 July 2002)
5. Angell, M., Relman, A., 2002. Patents, profits and American medicine: conflicts of interest in the testing and marketing of new drugs. Daedalus, Spring
6. Anon., 1998. ATMI's intellectual property portfolio reaches 100 patents. Business Wire, 6 October
7. Anon., 2000. Review of Kevin G. Rivette and David Kline, Rembrandts in the Attic. Whole Earth, Winter
8. Anon., 2002. AMD ranks fifth among US companies in US patents awarded. Business Wire, 22 January
9. Anon., 2002. German government opposes software patents. Available from http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story (accessed 16 July 2002)
10. Arora A. Patents, licensing, and market structure in the chemical industry Research Policy 26 1997 391-403
11. Australian Patent Office, 1981. Patent Literature - A Source of Technical Information. AGPS, Canberra
12. Betts, P., Groom, B., 2001. Industry urges faster EU reform. Financial Times, 20 March, p. 1
13. Blackman M. Taking patent information services to small and medium enterprises Intellectual Property in Asia and the Pacific 40 1994 44-67
14. Boyle J. Fencing off ideas: enclosure and the disappearance of the public domain Daedalus Spring 2002 13-25
15. Braun E. Macdonald S. Revolution in Miniature. The History and Impact of Semiconductor Electronics 1982 Cambridge University Press Cambridge
16. Breheny M. McQuaid R. The Development of High Technology Industries: An International Survey 1987 Croom Helm London
17. Brotz, D., 1994. Public Hearing on the Use of the Patent System to Protect Software Related Inventions. San Jose CA, 26 January
18. Caulfield T. Gold E. Cho M. Patenting human genetic material: refocusing the debate Perspectives 1 2000 228-231
19. Charles, D., Conway, C., 2001. Higher Education-Business Interaction Survey. CURDS, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, December
20. Cohen, D., 2001. La propriété intellectuelle, c'est le vol. Le Monde, 8-9 April, 1, 13
21. Cohen, W., Nelson, R., Walsh, J., 2000. Protecting their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 7552
22. Collins D. Management Fads and Buzzwords 2000 Routledge London
23. Conner K. Strategies for product cannibalism Strategic Management Journal 9 1988 9-26
24. Drahos, P., 2000. Trade-offs and Trade Linkages: TRIPS in a Negotiating Context. Quaker United Nations Office Occasional Paper 1, September
25. Dunford R. The suppression of technology as a strategy for controlling resource dependence Administrative Science Quarterly 32 1987 512-525
26. Economist, 2001. The right to good ideas. 23 June, pp. 27-28
27. Economist, 2001. An end to slavery. 24 November, p. 76, 81
28. Economist, 2001. Patent problems pending. 27 October, p. 14
29. Economist, 2001. Patent remedies. 27 October, p. 100
30. Economist, 2002. Mercky prospects. 13 July, pp. 59-60
31. Eisenberg R. Nelson R. Public vs. proprietary science: a fruitful tension? Daedalus Spring 2002 89-101
32. Feller I. Universities as engines of R-D-based economic growth: they think they can Research Policy 19 1990 335-348
33. Foley, S., 2001. Drugs company refuses to relax crucial patent. Independent, 24 October
34. Foley S. Glaxo dives on patents setback in US court Independent 25 May 2002 21
35. Forester T. Silicon Samurai. How Japan Conquered the World's IT Industry 1993 Blackwell Oxford
36. Frieswick, K., 2001. License to steal? CFO Magazine for Senior Finance Executives, September
37. Gibson S. US Patent Office's softening opens floodgates for lawsuits Infoworld 14 35 1992 36
38. Glass B. Patently unfair? Infoworld 12 44 1990 56-62
39. Glass B. Modem users, fear not; it's just the sound of patent attorneys Infoworld 14 31 1992 81
40. Godwin, M., 2002. Prescription panic: how the anthrax scare challenged drug patents. Reason, February
41. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators Journal of Economic Literature 28 1990 1661-1707
42. Griliches Z. Hall B. Pakes A. R-D, patents, and market value revisited: Is there a second (technological opportunity) factor? Economics of Innovation and New Technology 1 1991 183-201
43. Grindley P. Teece D. Managing intellectual capital: licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics California Management Review 39 2 1997 8-41
44. Hall, B., Ham, R., 1999. The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 7062
45. Harvey D. BTG: the mother of invention Director September 1989 121-122
46. Hazelwood, S., 1999. Pending cases will set tone for new patent field. Business Journal, 24 December
47. Heller M. Eisenberg R. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research Science 280 1998 698-701
48. Horstmann I. MacDonald G. Slivinski A. Patents as information transfer mechanisms: to patent or (maybe) not to patent Journal of Political Economy 93 5 1985 837-858
49. Howes K. The shield and the sword Satellite Communications 17 1 1993 6A-9A
50. Huczynski A. Explaining the succession of management fads International Journal of Human Resource Management 4 2 1993 443-463
51. Intellectual Property and Competition Review Committee, 2000. Review of Intellectual Property Legislation under the Competition Principles Agreement. IP Australia, Canberra, September
52. Johnston, R., Carmichael, S., 1981. Australian Science and Technology Indicators Feasibility Study - Private Enterprise, Department of Science and Technology Occasional Paper 4/81, Canberra
53. Joseph R. Silicon Valley myth and the origins of technology parks in Australia Science and Public Policy 16 6 1989 353-366
54. Kass L. The right to patent Dialogue 58 4 1982 42-45
55. Kevles D. Of mice and money: the story of the world's first animal patent Daedalus Spring 2002 78-88
56. Kortum S. Lerner J. What is behind the recent surge in patenting? Research Policy 28 1999 1-22
57. Kretschmer M. Soetendorp R. The strategic use of business method patents: a pilot study of out of court settlements Journal of e-Business 2 1 2001 9-38
58. Labich K. The innovators Fortune 6 June 1988 27-32
59. Lanjouw, J., Lerner, J., 1997. The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Empirical Literature. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 6296. Cambridge, MA
60. Leadbeater, C., 1999. New measures for the new economy. Paper presented to the symposium on Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital: Experience, Issues and Prospects, Amsterdam, June
61. Lerner J. Patenting in the shadow of competitors Journal of Law and Economics 38 1995 463-495
62. Lerner, J., 2002. The patent system and competition statement to the Federal Trade Commission/Department of Justice hearings on competition and intellectual property law and policy in the knowledge-based economy. Available from www.ftc.gov/opp/intellect/lernerjosh.pdf (accessed 22 June 2002)
63. Macdonald S. Technology and the Tyranny of Export Controls. Whisper Who Dares 1990 Macmillan London
64. Macdonald S. Culture and image in international strategy: engineering and metal-bashing Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 7 4 1995 355-369
65. Macdonald S. Too close for comfort. Implications for strategy and change arising from getting close to the customer California Management Review 37 4 1995 8-27
66. Macdonald S. Managing with method: information for innovation Lamberton D. Managing the Global: Globalisation, Employment and Quality of Life 2001 209-221 Tauris London
67. Macdonald, S., 2002. Exploring the hidden costs of patents. In: Drahos, P., Mayne, R. (Eds), Global Intellectual Property Rights: Knowledge, Access and Development. Macmillan, Basingstoke
68. Macdonald, S., 2003. Worlds apart: Patent information and innovation in SMEs. In: Blackburn, R. (Ed.), Intellectual Property and Innovation Management in Small Firms: Results from a Research Programme. Routledge, London 123-143
69. Macher J. Mowery D. Hodges D. Reversal of fortune. The recovery of the US semiconductor industry California Management Review 41 1 1998 107-136
70. Machlup, F., 1958. An Economic Review of the Patent System. Studies of the US Patent System No. 15, US Senate Sub-committee on Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights, USGPO, Washington DC
71. Mandeville T. Bishop J. Economic effects of the patent system: results of a survey of patent attorneys Mandeville T. Lamberton D. Bishop J. Supporting Papers for Economic Effects of the Patent System 1982 16 AGPS Canberra
72. Mann M. Canary P. Protecting innovation through patents Business and Economic Review 39 2 1993 25-27
73. Markham J. Inventive activity: Government controls and the legal environment National Bureau of Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Economic Activity 1962 Princeton University Press Princeton NJ
74. Merges R. Nelson R. On the complex economics of patent scope Columbia Law Review 90 4 1990 839-916
75. Merges R. Commercial success and patent standards: economic perspectives on innovation California Law Review 76 1988 805-876
76. Merges R. Patent Law and Policy 1997 Michie Charlottesville VA
77. Miller W. Productivity and competition: a look at the pharmaceutical industry Columbia Journal of World Business, Fall 1988 85-88
78. Moss C. Evans A. Protecting ideas and new products Industrial Management and Data Systems September/October 1987 21-24
79. Mossinghoff G. Bombelles T. The importance of intellectual property protection to the American research-intensive pharmaceutical industry Columbia Journal of World Business 31 1 1996 38-48
80. Mowery D. Sampat B. Patenting and licensing university inventions: lessons from the history of the Research Corporation Industrial and Corporate Change 10 2 2001 317-355
81. Narin, F., undated. Patent indicators, international technology comparisons and company stock performance. Available from http://www.interdependenc.org/pages/Narin.htm (accessed May 2002)
82. National Science Foundation, 1998. Science and Engineering Indicators 1998. National Science Board, Washington, DC
83. Nies H. Ten years of patent law development under the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit IIC: International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law 24 6 1993 797-802
84. O'Donoghue T. Scotchmer S. Thisse J.-F. Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 7 1 1998 1-32
85. O'Shaughnessy J. Strategy for the times: intellectual property can drive corporate responsibility Parr Russell L. Sullivan Patrick H. Technology Licensing, Corporate Strategies for Maximizing Value 1996 147-173 Wiley New York
86. Pakes A. Griliches Z. Patents and R-D at the firm level Economics Letters 5 1980 377-381
87. Patel P. Pavitt K. Patterns of technological activity: their measurement and interpretation Stoneman P. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change 1995 14-51 Blackwell Oxford
88. Patel P. Pavitt K. Large firms in the production of the world's technology: an important case of 'non-globalisation' Journal of International Business Studies 22 1991 1-21
89. Pavitt K. Patent statistics as indicators of innovative activities: possibilities and problems Scientometrics 7 1-2 1985 77-99
90. Perry N. The surprising new power of patents Fortune 23 June 1986 73-83
91. Peters T. Waterman R. In Search of Excellence. Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies 1982 Harper - Row New York
92. Pilling D. Patent case holds key for drug groups Financial Times 18 April 2001 12
93. Powell W. Inter-organizational collaboration in the biotechnology industry Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 152 1996 197-215
94. Puttre, M., 1998. A banner year for Big Blue patents, Design News, 16 February
95. Quintas P. Guy K. Collaborative, pre-competitive R-D and the firm Research Policy 24 1995 325-348
96. Rivette K. Kline D. Discovering new value in intellectual property Harvard Business Review January/February 2000 54-66
97. Rivette K. Kline D. Rembrandts in the Attic. Unlocking the Hidden Value of Patents 2000 Harvard Business School Press Boston MA
98. Rosenberg N. Nelson R. American universities and technical advance in industry Research Policy 23 1994 323-348
99. Rothwell R. Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s R-D Management 22 3 1992 221-239
100. Rubenstein, D., 1998. Patent profits. Industry Week, 2 November
101. Schumpeter J.A. Business Cycles 1939 McGraw-Hill New York
102. Scotchmer S. Standing on the shoulders of giants: cumulative research and the patent law Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 1 1991 29-41
103. Scullion, J., 2002. Patenting Genes: An Analysis of the Interaction between Law and Industry in Policy Formulation, CIPPM Working Paper 3, Bournmouth University
104. Shapiro C. Responding to the changing patent system Research Technology Management 33 5 1990 38-43
105. Shapiro C. Navigating the patent thicket: cross licences, patent pools, and standard-setting Jaffe A. Lerner J. Stern S. Innovation Policy and the Economy vol. 1 2001 119-150 MIT Press Cambridge, MA
106. Shulman S. Owning the Future 1999 Houghton Mifflin Boston
107. Shulman, S., 1999, Patent absurdities. Sciences, January
108. Silverman A. Intellectual property law and the venture capital process High Technology Law Journal 5 1 1990 157-192
109. Sosnin, B., 2000. A pat(ent) on the back. HR Magazine, March
110. Spero D. Patent protection or piracy - a CEO's view Harvard Business Review September/October 1990 58-67
111. Sullivan P. Daniele J. Intellectual property folios in business strategy Parr R. Sullivan P. Technology Licensing, Corporate Strategies for Maximizing Value 1996 27-48 Wiley New York
112. Sulston J. Ferry G. The Common Thread. A Story of Science, Politics, Ethics and the Human Genome 2002 Bantam London
113. Taylor C. Silberston Z. The Economic Impact of the Patent System 1973 Cambridge University Press Cambridge
114. Thurow L. Needed: a new system of intellectual property rights Harvard Business Review September/October 1997 95-103
115. Trune D. Goslin L. University technology transfer programs: a profit/loss analysis Technology Forecasting and Social Change 57 1998 197-204
116. Turner J. The nonmanufacturing patent owner: toward a theory of efficient infringement California Law Review 86 1998 179-210
117. Udell G. It's still caveat, inventor Journal of Product Innovation Management 7 1990 230-243
118. Vos E. Views of the pharmaceutical companies on the new EU licensing procedures ESRA Rapporteur March-April 2000 22-27
119. Wheelwright, J., 2002. Review of Healy, D. The Creation of Psychopharmacology. Independent, 7 May, p. 12