The role of software intellectual property rights in strengthening industry performance: Evidence from South Korea

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 92, Issue , 2015, Pages 140-154

  Suh, Dukrok ^a   Oh, Dong hyun ^b  

^a Korea Institute of Science and Technology   (South Korea)

^b Inha University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Intellectual property right; Software copyright; Software patent; Stochastic frontier analysis; Technical efficiency

Indexed keywords

COPYRIGHTS; DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; EFFICIENCY; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; SOFTWARE COPYRIGHTS; SOFTWARE PATENTS; STOCHASTIC FRONTIER ANALYSIS; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY;

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; SOFTWARE; STOCHASTICITY; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

SOUTH KOREA;

EID: 84922377321     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Anselmo D., Ledgard H. Measuring productivity in the software industry. Comm. ACM 2003, 46:121-125.
2. Banker R.D. Estimating most productive scale size using data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1984, 17:35-44.
3. Baskerville R., Ramesh B., Levine L., Pries-Heje J., Slaughter S. Is internet-speed software development different?. IEEE Software 2003, 20:70-77.
4. Battese G.E., Coelli T.J. A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empir. Econ. 1995, 20:325-332.
5. Becchetti L., Bedoya D., Paganetto L. ICT investment, productivity and efficiency: evidence at firm level using a stochastic frontier approach. J. Prod. Anal. 2003, 20:143-167.
6. Bergstra J.A., Klint P. About "trivial" software patents: the ISNOT case. Sci. Comput. Program. 2007, 64:264-285.
7. Bessen J., Hunt R.M. An empirical look at software patents. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 2007, 16:157-189.
8. Bordoloi B., Ilami P., Mykytyn P., Mykytyn K. Copyrighting computer software: the look and feel controversy and beyond. Inf. Manag. 1996, 30:211-221.
9. Buzzell R., Gale B. The PIMS Principles: Linking Strategy to Performance 1987, Free Press, New York.
10. Chabchoub N., Niosi J. Explaining the propensity to patent computer software. Technovation 2005, 25:971-978.
11. Charnes A., Cooper W., Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1978, 2:429-444.
12. Crépon B., Duguet E., Mairessec J. Research, innovation and productivity: an econometric analysis at the firm level. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 1998, 7:115-158.
13. Ernst H. Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Res. Policy 2001, (30):143-157.
14. Foltz J., Kim K., Barham B. A dynamic analysis of university agricultural biotechnology patent production. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2003, 85:187-197.
15. Freel M. Patterns of innovation and skills in small firms. Technovation 2005, 25:123-134.
16. Graham S., Mowery D. Intellectual property protection in the U.S. software industry. Patents in the Knowledge-based Economy 2003, 219-258. National Academies Press. W.M. Cohen, S.A. Merrill, National Research Council (U.S.) (Eds.).
17. Grecsek M. Software copyright: innovation, not imitation. J. Syst. Manag. 1988, 39:28-30.
18. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 1990, 28:1661-1707.
19. Groth R. Is the software Industry's productivity declining?. IEEE Softw. 2004, 21:92-94.
20. Hall B., MacGarvie M. The private value of software patents. NBER Working Paper Series No. 12195 2006, NBER.
21. Hoff A. Second stage DEA: comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2007, 181:425-435.
22. Januszewski S., Köke J., Winter J. Product market competition, corporate governance and firm performance: an empirical analysis for Germany. Res. Econ. 2002, 56:299-332.
23. Kim S., Han G. A decomposition of total factor productivity growth in Korean manufacturing industries: a stochastic frontier approach. J. Prod. Anal. 2001, 16:269-281.
24. Kim E., Singal V. Mergers and market power: evidence from the airline industry. Am. Econ. Rev. 1993, 83:549-569.
25. Kneller R., Andrew P. The specification of the aggregate production function in the presence of inefficiency. Econ. Lett. 2003, 1:223-226.
26. Kumbhakar S., Lovell C. Stochastic Frontier Analysis 2000, Cambridge University Press, New York.
27. Landes W.M., Posner R.A. An economic analysis of copyright Law. J. Leg. Stud. 2007, 18:325-363.
28. Lee K., Lee J. Current status of venture investment on IT sector. KISDI ICT Policy Mag. 2003, 15:28-47. (in Korean).
29. Lee I., Sim D., Lee K. Structural change and public policy on venture industry. KISDI Policy Report 2000, (in Korean).
30. Lehner F. The software life cycle in computer applications. Long Range Plan. 1989, 22:38-50.
31. Lerner J., Zhu F. What is the impact of software patent shifts? evidence from lotus v. Borland. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 2007, 25:511-529.
32. Madachy R. Software Process Dynamics 2008, Wiley-IEEE Press, New Jersey.
33. Mann R. Do patents facilitate financing in the software industry?. Tex. Law Rev. 2005, 83:961-1030.
34. Mann R., Sager T. Patents, venture capital, and software start-ups. Res. Policy 2007, 36:193-208.
35. Maroto A., Rubalcaba L. Services productivity revisited. Serv. Ind. J. 2008, 28:337-353.
36. McQueen D., Olsson H. Growth of embedded software related patents. Technovation 2003, 23:533-544.
37. Nickell S. Competition and corporate performance. J. Polit. Econ. 1996, 104:724-746.
38. Oh D. Productivity growth, efficiency change and technical progress of Korean manufacturing industry. J. Asia Pac Econ. 2011, 38:47-64.
39. Pakes A., Griliches Z. Patents and R&D at the firm level: a first report. Econ. Lett. 1980, 5:377-381.
40. Park J. Has patentable subject matter been expanded? - a comparative study on software patent practices in the European Patent Office, the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the Japanese Patent Office. Int. J. Law Inf. Technol. 2005, 13:336-377.
41. Park W.G. Do intellectual property rights stimulate R&D and productivity growth? Evidence from cross-national and manufacturing industries data. Intellectual Property and Innovation in the Knowledge-Based Economy 2005, 9:1-9:51. Industry Canada, Ottawa. J. Putman (Ed.).
42. Raa T., Wolff E. Outsourcing of services and the productivity recovery in US manufacturing in the 1980s and 1990s. J. Prod. Anal. 2001, 16:149-165.
43. Robert L. The legal protection of computer software. Comm. ACM 1984, 27:422-426.
44. Robert H., James B. The software patent experiment. Bus. Rev. 2004, (Q3):22-32.
45. Schankerman M., Noel M. Strategic patenting and software innovation. LSE STICERD Research Paper No. EI43 2006.
46. Shao B., Shu W. Productivity breakdown of the information and computing technology industries across countries. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2004, 55:23-33.
47. Slottje D., Millimet D., Buchanan M. Econometric analysis of copyrights. J. Econ. 2007, 139:303-317.
48. Suh D., Hwang J. An analysis of the effect of software intellectual property rights on the performance of software firms in South Korea. Technovation 2010, 30:376-385.
49. Tang P. The use of copyright as a measure of innovation: software applications in the digital age. Intellect. Prop. Q. 1997, 1:71-91.
50. Thomas R. Debugging software patents: increasing innovation and reducing uncertainty in the judicial reform of software patent law. Santa Clara Comput. High Technol. Law J. 2008, 25:191-241.
51. Tobit J. Estimation of relationship for limited dependent variables. Econometrica 1958, 26:24-36.
52. Wölfl A. Productivity growth in services industries: an assessment of recent patterns and the role of measurement. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Paper 2003/7 2003, OECD, Paris.
53. Zhu J., Shen Z.H. A discussion of testing DMUs' returns to scale. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1995, 81:590-596.