Intellectual property rights and the evolution of scientific journals as knowledge platforms

International Journal of Industrial Organization

Volumn 36, Issue , 2014, Pages 83-94

  Fehder, Daniel C ^a   Murray, Fiona ^a   Stern, Scott ^a,b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Communities; Innovation; Intellectual property; Patents; Platforms; Scientific journals

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; PATENTS; PLATFORMS; SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS;

ECOSYSTEMS;

EID: 84908263039     PISSN: 01677187     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2014.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Stein, J.C., 2008. Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND J. Econ. 39 (3), 617-635.
2. Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., Gambardella, A., 2004. Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy. The MIT Press.
3. Bikard, Michaël, 2012. Is knowledge trapped inside the Ivory Tower? Technology spawning and the genesis of new science-based inventions. Sloan Working Paper.
4. Cameron, A. Colin, Trivedi, Pravin K., 2013. Regression Analysis of Count Data. Cambridge university press, p. 53.
5. Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R., Walsh, J.P., 2000. Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). National Bureau of Economic Research.
6. Collins, H.M., 1974. The TEA set: tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Sci. Stud. 4 (2), 165-185.
7. Dasgupta, Partha, David, Paul, 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Res. Policy 23, 487-521.
8. David, Paul, 2004. Can 'open science' be protected from the evolving regime of IPR protections? J. Inst. Theor. Econ. Z. Die Gesamte Staatswiss. 160 (1), 9-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1628/093245604773861069.
9. De Solla Price, D.J., 1965. Networks of scientific papers. Science 149 (3683), 510-515.
10. Ducor, P., 2000. Intellectual property - coauthorship and coinventorship. Science 289 (5481), 873-875. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5481.873.
11. Edelman, L.B., Suchman, M.C., 1997. The legal environments of organizations. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 23, 479-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.479.
12. Furman, J.L., Stern, Scott, 2011. Climbing atop the shoulders of giants: the impact of institutions on cumulative knowledge production. Am. Econ. Rev. 101 (5), 1933-1963.
13. Gans, Joshua, Stern, Scott, 2000. Incumbency and R&D incentives: licensing the gale of creative destruction. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 9 (4), 485-511. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/105864000567945.
14. Gans, Joshua, Fiona Murray, and Scott Stern. 2008. "Patents, Papers, Pairs & Secrets: Contracting over the Disclosure of Scientific Knowledge". Unpublished.
15. Garfield, E., Merton, R.K., 1979. Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities. vol. 8. Wiley, New York.
16. Geim, A.K., Novoselov, K.S., 2007. The rise of graphene. Nat. Mater. 6 (3), 183-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat1849.
17. Hagstrom, W.O., 1975. The Scientifi c Community. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.
18. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., 2001. The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools. National Bureau of Economic Research.
19. Hausman, Jerry A., Hall, Bronwyn H., Griliches, Zvi, 1984. Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass., USA, (http://www.nber.org/papers/t0017).
20. Heller, M., Eisenberg, R.S., 1998. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280 (5364), 698.
21. Hellmann, T., 2007. The role of patents for bridging the science to market gap. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 63 (4), 624-647.
22. Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., 1993. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Q. J. Econ. 108 (3), 577-598.
23. Kieff, F., 2005. IP Transactions: On the Theory & Practice of Commercializing Innovation. Washington U. School of Law Working Paper, Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper. No. 311.
24. Kitch, E.W., 1977. The nature and function of the patent system. J. Law Econ. 20, 265.
25. Lerner, J., Tirole, J., 2006. A model of forum shopping. Am. Econ. Rev. 96 (4), 1091-1113.
26. Lerner, J., Tufano, P., 2011. The Consequences of Financial Innovation: A Counterfactual Research Agenda. National Bureau of Economic Research.
27. Lessig, L., 2004. The creative commons. Mont. L. Rev. 65, 1.
28. McCabe, Mark, Snyder, Christopher, 2005. Open access and academic journal quality. Am. Econ. Rev. 95 (2), 453-458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/000282805774670112.
29. McCabe, Mark, Snyder, Christopher, 2007. Academic journal prices in a digital age: a two-sided market model. B.E. J. Econ. Anal. Policy 7 (1).
30. Mokyr, J., 2004. The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of The Knowledge Economy. Princeton Univ Press.
31. Mowery, David, Ziedonis, Arvids, 2007. Academic patents and materials transfer agreements: substitutes or complements? J. Technol. Transf. 32 (3), 157-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-006-9011-1.
32. Murray, Fiona, 2002. Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering. Res. Policy 31 (8-9), 1389-1403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00070-7.
33. Murray, Fiona, 2010. The oncomouse that roared: hybrid exchange strategies as a source of distinction at the boundary of overlapping institutions. Am. J. Sociol. 116 (2), 341-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/653599.
34. Murray, Fiona, Stern, Scott, 2007. Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: an empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 63 (4), 648-687.
35. Murray, Fiona, Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Kolev, J., Stern, Scott, 2009. Of Mice and Academics: Examining the Effect of Openness on Innovation. NBER Working Paper.
36. Novoselov, K.S., Geim, A.K., Morozov, S.V., Jiang, D., Zhang, Y., Dubonos, S.V., Grigorieva, I.V., Firsov, A.A., 2004. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 306 (5696), 666-669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1102896.
37. Rysman, Marc, Simcoe, Timothy, 2008. Patents and the performance of voluntary standard-setting organizations. Manag. Sci. 54 (11), 1920-1934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0919.
38. Schubert, A., Braun, T., 1993. Reference standards for citation based assessments. Scientometrics 26 (1), 21-35.
39. Shapiro, Carl, 2001. Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting. Innovation Policy and the Economy. vol. 1. MIT press, pp. 119-150 (http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10778.pdf).
40. Simcoe, Timothy, Graham, S.J.H., Feldman, M., 2007. Competing on Standards? Entrepreneurship, Intellectual Property and the Platform Paradox. National Bureau of Economic Research.
41. Stokes, D.E., 1997. Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Brookings Inst Pr.
42. Swedish Royal Academy, 2010. The Nobel Prize in Physics 2010. Press Release, (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel-prizes/physics/laureates/2010/press.html).
43. Tannock, Q., 2011. Exploiting carbon flatland. Nat. Mater. 11 (1), 2-5.
44. Walsh, John P., Cohen, Wesley M., Cho, Charlene, 2007. Where excludability matters: material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research. Res. Policy 36 (8), 1184-1203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.04.006.
45. Williams, H., 2010. Intellectual property rights and innovation: evidence from the human genome. NBER Working Paper.