Patent trolls on markets for technology - An empirical analysis of NPEs' patent acquisitions

Research Policy

Volumn 41, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1519-1533

  Fischer, Timo ^a   Henkel, Joachim ^a,b  

^a TUM SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT   (Germany)

^b CEPR   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Empirical study; Markets for technology; Patent acquisitions; Patent trolls

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS MODELS; CONTROL GROUPS; DATA SETS; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; LOW QUALITIES; MARKETS FOR TECHNOLOGY; PATENT TROLLS; POLICY IMPLICATIONS; TECHNOLOGY FIELDS;

COMMERCE; MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS; PROFITABILITY; PUBLIC POLICY; QUALITY CONTROL; SEA ICE; TECHNOLOGY;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 84866330285     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. A. Arora, and M. Ceccagnoli Patent protection, complementary assets, and firms' incentives for technology licensing Management Science 52 2 2006 293 308
2. A. Arora, A. Fosfuri, and A. Gambardella Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy 2001 MIT Press Cambridge, MA
3. A. Arora, and A. Gambardella The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour Research Policy 23 5 1994 523 532
4. Bessen, J.E.; Meurer, M.J.; 2005. The patent litigation explosion. Boston University School of Law Working Paper No. 05-18. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=831685 (accessed 04.21.11).
5. J.E. Bessen, and M.J. Meurer Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk 2008 Princeton University Press Princeton, PA
6. Bessen, J.E.; Ford, J.L.; Meurer, M.J.; 2011. The private and social costs of patent trolls. Boston University School of Law, Law and Economics Research Paper No. 11-45. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1930272.
7. Bessen, J.; Meurer, M.J.; 2012. The direct costs from NPE disputes. Boston University School of Law Working Paper No. 12-34
8. K. Blind, J. Edler, R. Frietsch, and U. Schmoch Motives to patent: empirical evidence from Germany Research Policy 35 2006 655 672
9. I.M. Cockburn, M. MacGarvie, and E. Müller Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance Industrial and Corporate Change 19 3 2010 899 925
10. W.M. Cohen, R.R. Nelson, and J.P. Walsh Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not), NBER Working Paper No. 7552 2000 National Bureau of Economics Research, Inc. Cambridge, MA
11. L. Davis Licensing strategies of the new intellectual property vendors California Management Review 50 2 2008 6 30
12. European Patent Office, 2009. Worldwide Patent Statistical Database (PATSTAT). http://www.epo.org/patents/patent-information/raw-data/test/product- 14-24.html (accessed 04.21.11).
13. European Patent Office, 2009. INPADOC database - legal status data http://www.epo.org/patents/patent-information/raw-data/test/product-14-11.html (accessed 04.21.11).
14. Fischer, T.; Ringler, P.; 2010. The Coincidence of Patent Thickets - A Comparative Analysis. Working Paper.
15. A. Galasso, and M.A. Schankerman Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation RAND Journal of Economics 41 3 2010 472 503
16. A. Gambardella, P. Giuri, and A. Luzzi The market for patents in Europe Research Policy 36 2007 1163 1183
17. J.S. Gans, and S. Stern The product market and the market for 'ideas': commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs Research Policy 32 2 2003 333 350
18. J.S. Gans, D.H. Hsu, and S. Stern The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: Evidence from patent grant delays Management Science 54 5 2008 982 997
19. J.M. Golden Patent trolls and patent remedies Texas Law Review 85 2007 2111 2161
20. S.J.H. Graham, and D.C. Mowery Intellectual property protection in the U.S. software industry W.M. Cohen, S.A. Merrill, Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy 2003 National Academies Press Washington, DC 219 258
21. B.H. Hall, and R. Ziedonis The Patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979-1995 Rand Journal of Economics 32 1 2001 101 128
22. Hall, B.H.; Ziedonis, R.; 2007. An empirical analysis of patent litigation in the semiconductor industry. Working paper. Available at: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/∼bhhall/papers/HallZiedonis07-PatentLitigation-AEA. pdf (accessed 04.21.11).
23. D. Harhoff, and M. Reitzig Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants - the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals International Journal of Industrial Organization 22 4 2004 443 480
24. D. Harhoff, F.M. Scherer, and K. Vopel Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights Research Policy 32 2003 1343 1363
25. J. Heckman Sample selection as a specification error Econometrica 47 1 1979 153 162
26. Henkel, J.; Reitzig, M.; 2007. Patent sharks and the sustainability of value destruction strategies. Working Paper, Technische Universität München, http://ssrn.com/abstract=985602 (accessed 04.21.2011).
27. A.B. Jaffe, and J. Lerner Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It 2004 Princeton University Press Princeton
28. D. Kash, and W. Kingston Patents in a world of complex technologies Science and Public Policy 28 1 2001 11 22
29. G. King, and L. Zeng Logistic regression in rare events data Political Analysis 9 2001 137 163
30. N.R. Lamoreaux, and K.L. Sokoloff Inventive Activity and the Market for Technology in the United States, 1840-1920. NBER Working Paper 7107 1999 National Bureau of Economics Research, Inc. Cambridge, MA
31. J.O. Lanjouw, A. Pakes, and J. Putnam How to count patents and value intellectual property: uses of patent renewal and applications data Journal of Industrial Economics 46 1998 405 432
32. Lanjouw, J.; Schankerman, M.; 1997. Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership. NBER Working Paper No. 6297.
33. Lanjouw, J.; Schankerman, M.; 2000. Patent Suits: Do They Distort Research Incentives? CEPR Working Paper No. 2042.
34. J.O. Lanjouw, and M. Schankerman Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition RAND Journal of Economics 32 1 2001 129 151
35. M.A. Lemley, and C. Shapiro Patent holdup and royalty stacking Texas Law Review 85 2007 1991 2048
36. J. Lerner The importance of patent scope: an empirical analysis RAND Journal of Economics 25 2 1994 319 333
37. Lerner, J.; 2006. Trolls on State Street? The Litigation of Financial Patents, 1976-2005. Working Paper. http://www.people.hbs.edu/jlerner/Trolls.pdf (accessed 04.21.11).
38. R.C. Levin, A.K. Klevorick, R.R. Nelson, and S.G. Winter Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1987 3 1987 783 831
39. G. Magliocca Blackberries and barnyards: patent trolls and the perils of innovation Notre Dame Law Review 82 5 2007 1809 1838
40. R.P. Merges, and R.R. Nelson On the complex economics of patent scope Columbia Law Review 90 1990 839 916
41. M. Meyer Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature Research Policy 29 2000 409 434
42. F. Narin, H.S. Kimberly, and D. Olivastro The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science Research Policy 26 3 1997 317 330
43. F. Narin, and E. Noma Is technology becoming science? Scientometrics 7 3-6 1985 369 381
44. F. Narin, E. Noma, and R. Perry Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength Research Policy 16 1987 143 155
45. OECD Using Patent Data as Science and Technology Indicators. Patent Manual. 1994
46. R.L. Prentice, and R. Pyke Logistic disease incident models and case-control studies Biometrica 66 1979 403 411
47. J. Putnam The Value of International Patent Rights 1996 Yale University Press Connecticut, NJ
48. M. Reitzig What determines patent value? Insights from the semiconductor industry Research Policy 32 1 2003 13 26
49. M. Reitzig Improving patent valuations for management purposes - validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales Research Policy 33 2004 939 957
50. M. Reitzig, J. Henkel, and C.H. Heath On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey - unrealistic damage awards and firms' strategies of 'being infringed' Research Policy 36 1 2007 134 154
51. M. Reitzig, J. Henkel, and F. Schneider Collateral damage for R & D manufacturers: How patent sharks operate in markets for technology Industrial and Corporate Change 19 3 2010 947 967
52. Risch, M.; 2012. Patent troll myths. Seton Hall Law Review 42, forthcoming.
53. A.J. Scott, and C.J. Wild Fitting logistic models under case-control or choice-based sampling Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B 48 2 1997 170 182
54. C.J. Serrano The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents RAND Journal of Economics 41 4 2010 686 708
55. Shapiro, C.; 2001. Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools and Standard Setting. Innovation Policy and the Economy. Ed. by A. Jaffe, J. Lerner, and S. Stern, Cambridge, MA.
56. S.K. Shresta Trolls or market-makers? An empirical analysis of nonpracticing entities Columbia Law Review 110 2010 114 160
57. Siebert, R.B.; von Graevenitz, G.; 2010. Licensing in the patent thicket - timing and benefits. Working paper. Available at: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen. de/24007/ (accessed 04.21.11).
58. O. Sorenson, J.W. Rivkin, and L. Fleming Complexity, networks and knowledge flow Research Policy 35 2006 994 1017
59. Tomz, M.; 1999. Relogit (Stata ado file). Available at: http://gking.harvard.edu/stats.shtml.
60. M. Trajtenberg A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations RAND Journal of Economics 21 1990 172 187
61. Turner, J.L.; 2011. Patent thickets, trolls and unproductive entrepreneurship. University of Georgia, Terry College of Business. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1916798.
62. U.S. Federal Trade Commission To Promote Innovation: The Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy 2003 Government Printing Office Washington
63. N. Van Zeebroeck, B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, and D. Guellec Claiming more: the increased voluminosity of patent applications and its determinants Research Policy 38 6 2009 1006 1020
64. W. Van de Ven, and B. Van Praag The demand for deductibles in private health insurance. A probit model with sample selection Journal of Econometrics 17 1981 229 252
65. G. Von Graevenitz, S. Wagner, and D. Harhoff How to measure patent thickets - a novel approach Economics Letters 111 1 2011 6 9
66. R. Ziedonis Don't fence me in: fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms Management Science 50 2004 804 820