Effects of the European Union trademark: Lessons for the harmonization of intellectual property systems

Research Policy

Volumn 48, Issue 7, 2019, Pages 1841-1854

  Herz, Benedikt ^a   Mejer, Malwina ^a  

^a EUROPEAN COMMISSION   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Community trademark; European Union trademark; Intellectual property systems; Madrid system; Trademarks; Unitary protection

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; TRADEMARKS;

EUROPEAN UNION; HIGH COSTS; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; MADRID SYSTEM; MARKET ENTRY; UNITARY PROTECTION;

INTERNATIONAL TRADE;

EID: 85065058732     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.04.010     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Albert, M.B., Avery, D., Narin, F., McAllister, P., Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Res. Policy 20:3 (1991), 251–259.
2. Barroso, A., Giarratana, M.S., Pasquini, M., Product portfolio performance in new foreign markets: the EU trademark dual system. Res. Policy 48:1 (2019), 11–21.
3. Beukel, K., Alcacer, J., Luo, H., Effects of an Unified System of Industrial Designs. 2017, DRUID NYU Stern School of Business, New York, 12–14 June 2017.
4. Block, J.H., De Vries, G., Schumann, J.H., Sandner, P., Trademarks and venture capital valuation. J. Bus. Ventur. 29 (2014), 525–542.
5. Castaldi, C., To trademark or not to trademark: the case of the creative and cultural industries. Res. Policy 47:3 (2018), 606–616.
6. Commission of the European Communities, Completing the internal market. White paper from the Commission to the European Council (Milan, 28-29 June 1985). COM, 85, 1985 310 final, 14 June 1985.
7. Danguy, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Cost-benefit analysis of the Community patent. J. Benefit. Anal. 2:2 (2011), 1–43.
8. de Rassenfosse, G., On the Price Elasticity of Demand for Trademarks. 2015, SSRN Working Paper 2628646, Rochester, New York.
9. de Rassenfosse, G., van Pottelsberghe, B., Per un pugno di dollari: a first look at the price elasticity of patents. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy 23:4 (2007), 588–604.
10. de Rassenfosse, G., van Pottelsberghe, B., A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship. Res. Policy 38:5 (2009), 779–792.
11. de Rassenfosse, G., van Pottelsberghe, B., On the price elasticity of demand for patents. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 74:1 (2012), 58–77.
12. de Rassenfosse, G., van Pottelsberghe, B., The role of fees in patent systems: theory and evidence. J. Econ. Surv. 27:4 (2013), 696–716.
13. de Rassenfosse, G., Schoen, A., Wastyn, A., Selection bias in innovation studies: a simple test. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 81 (2014), 287–299.
14. Eaton, J., Kortum, S., Lerner, J., International patenting and the European patent office: a quantitative assessment. Patents, Innovation and Economic Performance: OECD Conference Proceedings, 2004, 27–52.
15. European Commission, A single market for intellectual property rights. COM, 2011, 2011 287 final, 24 May 2011.
16. Feenstra, R.C., Inklaar, R., Timmer, M.P., The next generation of the penn world table. Am. Econ. Rev. 105:10 (2015), 3150–3182.
17. Filitz, R., Henkel, J., Tether, B.S., Protecting aesthetic innovations? An exploration of the use of registered community designs. Res. Policy 44:6 (2015), 1192–1206.
18. Flikkema, M., De Man, A.P., Castaldi, C., Are trademark counts a valid indicator of innovation? Results of an in-depth study of new Benelux trademarks filed by SMEs. Ind. Innov. 21:4 (2014), 310–331.
19. Gao, G., Hitt, L.M., Information technology and trademarks: implications for product variety. Manage. Sci. 58:6 (2012), 1211–1226.
20. Garaventa, C., Wegbrait, P., Integration in intellectual property in Latin America. Ng, E., Austin, G., (eds.) International Intellectual Property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability, 2017, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 291–302.
21. Giarratana, M.S., Fosfuri, A., Product strategies and survival in Schumpeterian environments: evidence from the US security software industry. Organ. Stud. 28:6 (2007), 909–929.
22. Greenhalgh, C., Rogers, M., The value of innovation: the interaction of competition, R&D and IP. Res. Policy 35:4 (2006), 562–580.
23. Hall, B., Helmers, C., The Impact of International Patent Systems: Evidence From European Patent Convention. 2018, NBER Working Paper 24207.
24. Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., Reichl, B., van Pottelsberghe, B., Patent validation at the country level - the role of fees and translation costs. Res. Policy 38:9 (2009), 1423–1437.
25. Helmers, C., Rogers, M., Innovation and the survival of new firms in the UK. Rev. Ind. Organ. 36:3 (2010), 227–248.
26. Herz, B., Mejer, M., On the fee elasticity of the demand for trademarks in Europe. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 68:4 (2016), 1039–1061.
27. Hipp, C., Grupp, H., Innovation in the service sector: the demand for service-specific innovation measurement concepts and typologies. Res. Policy 34:4 (2005), 517–535.
28. Krasnikov, A., Mishra, S., Orozco, D., Evaluating the financial impact of branding using trademarks: a framework and empirical evidence. J. Mark. 73:6 (2009), 154–166.
29. Landes, W.M., Posner, R.A., Trademark law: an economic perspective. J. Law Econ. 30:2 (1987), 265–309.
30. Liang, S., Keat, C., Proposal for a PAN-ASEAN trademark registration. Ng, E., Austin, G., (eds.) International Intellectual Property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability, 2017, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 210–229.
31. Malmberg, C., Trademarks Statistics As Innovation Indicator?-A Micro Study. 2005, CIRCLE, WP, 17.
32. Mangani, A., Measuring variety and quality of products with trademarks. Int. Econ. J. 21:4 (2007), 613–631.
33. Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law, ). Study on the Overall Functioning of the European Trade Mark System, Published on 8 March 2011. 2011.
34. Mejer, M., van Pottelsberghe, B., Economic incongruities in the European patent system. Eur. J. Law Econ. 34:1 (2012), 215–234.
35. Mendonça, S., Pereira, T.S., Godinho, M.M., Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change. Res. Policy 33:9 (2004), 1385–1404.
36. Meyer, L., Much ado about nothing? Characteristics, benefits and practical implications of the European Community Trademark. Chicago-Kent J. Intellect. Property 5:2 (2006), 158–176.
37. Millot, V., Trademarks As an Indicator of Product and Marketing Innovations. 2009, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2009/06, OECD Publishing, Paris.
38. Nicholas, T., Cheaper patents. Res. Policy 40:2 (2011), 325–339.
39. Pakes, A., Schankerman, M., The rate of obsolescence of patents, research gestation lags, and the private rate of return to research resources. R&D, Patents, and Productivity, 1984, University of Chicago Press, 73–88.
40. Park, W.G., Ginarte, J.C., Intellectual property rights and economic growth. Contemp. Econ. Policy 15:3 (1997), 51–61.
41. Qian, Y., Do national patent laws stimulate domestic innovation in a global patenting environment? A cross-country analysis of pharmaceutical patent protection, 1978–2002. Rev. Econ. Stat. 89:3 (2007), 436–453.
42. Sakakibara, M., Branstetter, L., Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence From the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms (No. w7066). 1999, National Bureau of Economic Research.
43. Sander, P., Block, J., The market value of R&D, patents, and trademarks. Res. Policy 40:7 (2011), 969–985.
44. Schmoch, U., Service marks as novel innovation indicator. Res. Eval. 12:2 (2003), 149–156.
45. Seethamraju, C., The value relevance of trademarks. Intangible Assets: Values, Measures, and Risks, 2003, Oxford University Press, 228–247.
46. Stoneman, P., Soft Innovation: Economics, Product Aesthetics, and the Creative Industries. 2010, Oxford University Press.
47. Trajtenberg, M., A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. Rand J. Econ. 21:1 (1990), 172–187.
48. van Pottelsberghe, B., Mejer, M., The London Agreement and the cost of patenting in Europe. Eur. J. Law Econ. 29:2 (2010), 211–237.