The private value of software patents

Research Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 994-1009

  Hall, Bronwyn H ^a   MacGarvie, Megan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Intellectual property rights; Patent value; Software patents

Indexed keywords

BEFORE AND AFTER; COURT DECISIONS; CUMULATIVE ABNORMAL RETURNS; FIRST LOOK; INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; MARKET VALUES; PATENT RIGHTS; SOFTWARE FIRMS; SOFTWARE PATENTS; STOCK MARKET; VALUE CREATION;

COMMERCE; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 77953689933     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.04.007     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Allison J.R., and Lemley M.A. Who's patenting what? An empirical exploration of patent prosecution. Vanderbilt Law Review 58 (2000) 2099-2148
2. Allison J.R., and Tiller E.H. Internet business method patents. In: Cohen W.M., and Merrill S.A. (Eds). Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy (2003), National Academies Press, National Research Council, Washington 259-284
3. Aharonian, G., 2005. Critiques of software patent examination. http://www.bustpatents.com/.
4. Arundel, A., Cobbenhagen, J., Schall, N., 2002. The Acquisition and Protection of Competencies by Enterprises. Report for EIMS project 98/180, DG Enterprise, European Union, Luxembourg.
5. Bakels, R., 2005. Current IPR Policies and Law Followed by Major Organisations in the Domain. Ghosh et al., Report to the European Commission on The Effects of Allowing Patent Claims for Computer-Implemented Inventions, August.
6. Bakels, R., Hugenholtz, P.B., 2002. The Patentability of Computer Programs. A Report to the European Parliament. IViR, Amsterdam.
7. Barton J.H. Non-Obviousness. IDEA Journal of Law and Technology 42 (2002)
8. Barton J.H. Reforming the patent system. Science 287 (2000) 1933-1934
9. Barton J. Non-obviousness. IDEA: The Journal of Law and Technology 43 (2003) 475
10. Bessen J., and Hunt R. An empirical look at software patents. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 16 1 (2007) 157-189
11. Blind K., Edler J., and Nack R. Micro- and Macro-Economic Implications of the Patentability of Software Innovations. Intellectual Property Rights in Information Technologies between Innovation and Competition (2001), Fraunhofer Institute and Max Planck Institute, Karlsruhe/Munich
12. Cockburn, I., MacGarvie, M., 2006. Entry, Exit and Patenting in the Software Industry. NBER Working Paper No. W12563. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=934758.
13. Cohen J.E., and Lemley M.A. Patent scope and innovation in the software industry. California Law Review 89 1 (2001) 1-57
14. Cohen W., Goto A., Nagata A., Nelson R., and Walsh J. R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States. Research Policy 31 (2002) 1349-1367
15. Dreyfuss R.C. Examining state street bank: developments in business method patenting. Computer und Recht International 2001 1 (2001) 1-9
16. Dreyfuss R.C. State street or easy street: is patenting business methods good for business?. Intellectual Property Law vol. 6 (2000), Juris Publishing Company, Ltd., London (Chapter 14)
17. Dvorak, J., 2005. Software patents: Microsoft's fatal error. PC magazine, April 18, 2005.
18. European Commission, 2002. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Patentability of Computer-implemented Inventions. Brussels, Belgium.
19. Evans D., and Layne-Farrar A. Software patents and open source: the battle over intellectual property rights. Virginia Journal of Law and Technology 9 Summer (10) (2004) 1-28
20. Gao, L., 2005. Essays on investments and financing decisions in complementary networks systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston University.
21. Graham S.J.H., and Mowery D.C. Intellectual property protection in the U.S. software industry. In: Cohen W.M., and Merrill S.A. (Eds). Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy (2003), National Academies Press, Washington, DC
22. Griliches Z. Market value, R&D, and patents. Economic Letters 7 (1981) 183-187
23. Hall B.H. Exploring the patent explosion. Journal of Technology Transfer 30 (2005) 35-48
24. Hall B.H., Graham S.J.H., Harhoff D., and Mowery D.C. Prospects for improving U.S. patent quality via post-grant opposition. Innovation Policy and the Economy 4 (2003) 115-143 MIT Press
25. Hall B.H., Jaffe A., and Trajtenberg M. Market value and patent citations. Rand Journal of Economics 36 (2005) 16-38
26. Heller M.A., and Eisenberg R.S. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280 (1998) 698-701
27. Hollander A.J. Patenting computer data structures: the ghost, the machine, and the federal circuit. Duke Law and Technology Review (2003) 0033
28. Hunt R.M. You can patent that? Are patents on computer programs and business methods good for the new economy?. Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank Business Review 2001 Q1 (2001) 5-15
29. Huttner C., and Strobert A. New proposed guidelines on patentability of computer-implemented inventions. New York Law Journal September (1995) Copyright 1995 New York Law Publishing Company
30. Jaffe A. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review 76 5 (1986) 984-1001
31. Kasdan, J., 1999. Obviousness and new technologies. Columbia University Center for Law and Economics Studies Working Paper No. 146, New York, NY.
32. Kasdan, J., 1994. Fascinatin' Algorithm: Patent Protection for Computer Programs. Columbia University Center for Law and Economic Studies Working Paper No. 94.
33. Lerner J. Where does state street lead? A first look at finance patents, 1971-2000. Journal of Finance 57 (2001) 901-930
34. Layne-Farrar, A., 2005. Defining Software Patents: A Research Field Guide. AEI Working Paper 05-14. Available at http://www.reg-markets.org/publications/abstract.php?pid=971.
35. Lunney Jr. G.S. e-Obviousness. Michigan Telecommunications Technology Law Review 7 (2001) 363-422
36. Mann, R., 2004. The Myth of the Software Patent Thicket. Bepress Legal Series Working Paper 183. Available at http://law.bepress.com/expresso/eps/183.
37. Meurer M.J. Business method patents and patent floods. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 8 (2002) 309
38. Murmann J.P. Knowledge and Competitive Advantage: The Co-evolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
39. Nagaoka, S., Motohashi, K., Goto A. Patent statistics as an innovation indicator. In: Hall, B.H., Rosenberg, N. (eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 2010.
40. Noel, M., Schankerman, M. 2006. Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 5701, London. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=922111.
41. Raduchel W. The economics of software. In: Jorgenson D.W., and Wessner C.W. (Eds). Software, Growth, and the Future of the U.S. Economy, Report of a Workshop (2006), National Academies Press, Washington DC
42. Samuelson P. CONTU revisited: the case against copyright protection for computer programs in machine-readable form. Duke Law Journal 4 September (1984) 663-702
43. Scotchmer S. Protecting early innovators: should second generation products be patentable?. Rand Journal of Economics 27 (1996) 322-331
44. Scotchmer S. Standing on the shoulders of giants: cumulative research and the patent law. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (1991) 29-41
45. Spindler G. The European legal framework for software patents. Paper Presented at the EPIP Conference on New Challenges to the Patent System, EPO, April 24-25, 2003. Munich, Germany (2003)
46. State Street Bank and Trust Co., Inc. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
47. Sterne R., and Bugaisky L. The expansion of statutory subject matter under the 1952 patent act. Akron Law Review 37 (2004) 216-229
48. Stobbs G.A. Software practice news: the common thread unraveled. Intellectual Property Today (1995) 6 Copyright 1995 Omega Communications, Inc.
49. USPTO, 1995. Proposed Guidelines for Computer-Implemented Inventions. http://www.uspto.gov, 1 June 1995.