A quality index for patent systems

Research Policy

Volumn 42, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 704-719

  De Saint Georges, Matthis ^a   Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie, Bruno ^a,b  

^a SOLVAY BRUSSELS SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT   (Belgium)

^b CEB and Bruegel ^*  (Belgium)

Author keywords

Intellectual property; Patent propensity; Patent system; Quality

Indexed keywords

IMAGE QUALITY; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; QUALITY ASSURANCE;

ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS; OPERATIONAL DESIGN; PATENT PROPENSITY; PATENT SYSTEM; QUALITY INDICES; RESEARCH EFFORTS; RESOURCE ALLOCATION POLICY; RULES AND REGULATIONS;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 84875229500     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.003     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. AIPPI, 2007. Question Q193. Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications. Summary Report.
2. E. Archontopoulos, D. Guellec, N. Stevnsborg, B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, and N. van Zeebroeck When small is beautiful: Measuring the evolution and consequences of the voluminosity of patent applications at the EPO Information Economics and Policy 19 2 2007 103 132
3. J. Bessen, and M.J. Meurer Patent Failure: How Judges, Lawyers and Bureaucrats Put Innovators at Risk, Princeton 2008 Princeton University Press NJ
4. D. Burk, and M. Lemley Policy levers in Patent law Virginia Law Review 89 7 2003 1575 1696
5. S. Claessens, and L. Laeven Financial development, property rights, and growth Journal of Finance 58 6 2003 2401 2436
6. Cockburn, I.M.; Kortum, S.; Stern, S.; 2002. Are All Patent Examiners Equal? The Impact of Examiner Characteristics. NBER Working Paper Series, w8980.
7. Danguy, J.; de Rassenfosse, G.; van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B.; 2010. The R&D-patent relationship: an industry perspective. EIB Papers from European Investment Bank, Economic and Financial Studies. No. 7/2009.
8. G. de Rassenfosse, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie Per un pugno di dollari: a first look at the price elasticity of patents Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23 4 2007 588 604
9. G. de Rassenfosse, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship Research Policy 38 5 2009 779 792
10. G. de Rassenfosse, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie On the price elasticity of demand for patents Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 74 1 2012 58 77
11. de Rassenfosse, G.; van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. The role of fees in patent systems: theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, forthcoming.
12. Dewatripont, M.; Legros, P.; 2008. "Essential" Patents, FRAND Royalties and Technology Standards. ECARES Working Paper 2008-010.
13. J. Farrell, and C. Shapiro How strong are weak Patents? American Economic Review 98 4 2008 1347 1369
14. C. Franzoni, and G. Scellato The grace period in international patent law and its effect on the timing of disclosure Research Policy 39 2010 200 213
15. Friebel, G.; Koch, A.; Prady, D.; Seabright, P.; 2006. Objectives and Incentives at the European Patent Office. Centre IDEI- Institutd'EconomieIndustrielle, Université de Toulouse.
16. N. Gallini The economics of patents: lessons from recent U.S. patent reform Journal of Economic Perspectives 16 2 2002 131 154
17. J. Ginarte, and W. Park Determinants of patent rights: a cross-national study Research Policy 26 1997 283 301
18. Graham, S.; Hall, B.; Harhoff, D.; Mowery, D.; 2002. Post-issue Patent 'Quality Control': A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-examinations and European Patent Oppositions. NBER Working Paper No. W8807.
19. Graham, S.; Harhoff, D.; 2006. Can Post-grant Reviews Improve Patent System Design? A Twin Study of US and European Patents. CEPR Discussion Paper 5680, 29 p.
20. G. Grossman, and E. Lai International protection of intellectual property American Economic Review 94 5 2004 1635 1653
21. D. Guellec, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie Applications, grants and the value of patents Economic Letters 69 1 2000 109 114
22. D. Guellec, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie The Economics of the European Patent System 2007 Oxford University Press Oxford p. 250
23. D. Harhoff, K. Hoisl, B. Reichl, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie Patent validation at the country level: the role of fees and translation costs Research Policy 38 9 2009 1423 1437
24. D. Hegde, D. Mowery, and S. Graham pioneering inventors or thicket builders: which U.S. firms use continuations in patenting? Management Science 55 7 2009 1214 1226
25. A. 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 New Jersey 236 p
26. P. Jensen, A. Palangkaraya, and E. Webster Disharmony in international patent office decisions The Federal Circuit Bar Journal 15 4 2006 679 712
27. Langinier, C.; Marcoul, P.; 2009. Monetary and Implicit Incentives of Patent Examiners. Working Paper, University of Alberta.
28. G. Lazaridis, and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie The rigor of EPO's patentability criteria: an insight into the "induced withdrawals" World Patent Information 29 4 2007 317 326
29. M. Lemley Rational ignorance at the patent office Northwestern University Law Review 95 4 2001 1495 1528
30. Lerner, J.; 2002. Patent Protection and Innovation Over 150 Years. NBER Working Paper No. 8977.
31. London Economics Patent Backlogs and Mutual Recognition 2010 Intellectual Property Office
32. Maskus, K.E.; 2006. Reforming U.S. Patent Policy: Getting the Incentives Right. CSR 19, November, Council on Foreign Relations, USA, 45 p.
33. R.P. Merges Property rights theory and the commons: the case of scientific research Social Philosophy and Policy 13 1996 145 167 10.1017/S0265052500003496
34. J. Mueller Introduction to Patent Law, Aspen Law & Business 2003 398 p
35. T. O'Donoghue A patentability requirement for sequential innovation Rand Journal of Economics 29 4 1998 654 679
36. Palangkaraya, A.; Webster, E.; Jensen, P. Misclassification between patent offices: evidence from a matched sample of patent applications. The Review of Economics and Statistics, forthcoming.
37. W. Park International patent protection: 1960-2005 Research Policy 37 2008 761 766
38. Picard, P.; van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B.; 2011. Patent Office Governance and Patent System Quality. ECARES Working Paper, 2011-007.
39. C. Quillen Innovation and the U.S. patent system Virginia Law and Business Review 1 2 2006 207 237
40. C. Quillen Commentary on Bessen and Meurer's patent failure: an industry perspective Journal of Intellectual Property Law 16 1 2008 57 82
41. C. Quillen, and O. Webster Continuing Patent applications and performance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Federal Circuit Bar Journal 11 1 2001 1 21
42. C. Quillen, and O. Webster Continuing patent applications and performance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office - one more time The Federal Circuit Bar Journal 18 3 2009 379 404
43. C. Quillen, O. Webster, and R. Eichmann Continuing patent applications and performance of the US Patent and Trademark Office - extended Federal Circuit Bar Journal 12 1 2002 35 55
44. F.M. Scherer The economics of the human gene patents Academic Medicine 77 12 part 2 2002 1348 1367
45. S. Scotchmer, and J. Green Novelty and disclosure in patent law RAND Journal of Economics 1 1 1990 131 146
46. B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie The quality factor in patent systems Industrial and Corporate Change 20 6 2011 1755 1793
47. B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, and D. François The cost factor in patent systems Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 9 4 2009 329 355
48. B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, and M. Mejer The London agreement and the cost of patenting in Europe European Journal of Law and Economics 29 2 2010 211 237
49. 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
50. WIPO, 2008. Standing Committee on the Law of Patents, Twelfth Session. Geneva, June 23-27, pp. 137.
51. Yamauchi, I.; Nagaoka, S.; 2009. Reforms of Patent Examination Request System in Japan: Some Lessons. IIR Working Paper.