Strategic patent breadth and entry deterrence with drastic product innovations

Yiannaka, Amalia; Fulton, Murray

doi:10.1016/j.ijindorg.2005.06.001

Cited by 45 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(See Dunford (1987) for a description of classic examples of this practice.) This concern is consistent with the analysis of Yiannaka and Fulton (2006) who find that US firms often use excessive patent breadth to deter entry by competitors. This highlights an inefficient use of the patent system, as excessive patent breadth may leave innovations under-commercialized.…”

supporting

confidence: 86%

Intellectual Property Protection as Strategic Trade Policy

Brander

2007

Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the WTO agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights implemented in 1995, international coordination of intellectual property (IP) policy remains contentious. This paper reviews recent research addressing whether IP policy should be standardized across countries, and whether IP protection has become overly cumbersome. It concludes that much IP protection is excessive (possibly reflecting regulatory "capture") and that international standardization has regressive redistributive effects and unclear efficiency effects. Coordinated decentralization would be preferred. It also suggests that much intellectual property protection can be viewed as "strategic trade policy" whose primary effect is "profit-shifting" rather than the enhancement of economic efficiency.JEL Classification: O34, F12, F5

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 86%

Intellectual Property Protection as Strategic Trade Policy

Brander

2007

Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, patents with high or low number of claims may be equally interesting for an organisation, as long as they contain that specific knowledge that is needed by the organisation. Moreover, some authors suggested that claims may be strategically added by applicants in order to increase the breadth of patent protection and block Downloaded by [University of Nebraska, Lincoln] at 23:37 05 April 2015 potential competitors (Lanjouw and Schankerman 2001;Yiannaka and Fulton 2006). Accordingly, the influence of the firm's strategic behaviour on the number of claims may introduce a bias in the analysis of the relationship between the number of claims and the likelihood of patent acquisition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the determinants of patent acquisition in biotechnology: an empirical analysis

Petruzzelli

Natalicchio

Garavelli

2015

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquiring patents is an increasingly relevant opportunity for innovating companies, especially after the rise and development of the so-called markets for technologies (MFTs). However, only scant attention has been devoted to investigate patents' characteristics influencing their acquisition by organisations. Accordingly, this paper aims at filling this gap by analysing how four main characteristics -as patent scope, scientific knowledge cited by the patent, forward patent citations, and number of patent claims -impact the likelihood of patent acquisition. We based our statistical analysis on a sample of 9716 US Patent and Trademark Office patents assigned to 165 biotechnological firms. Results support our conjectures and offer interesting managerial implications for organisations operating within MFTs indicating which characteristics make patented technological solutions more likely to be acquired by other firms, as a narrow scope, inclusion of scientific knowledge, and a number of forward citations able to increase patent's impact and exclusion rights.

show abstract

“…4 As an example, a broad patent makes it harder for competitors to enter the market with non-infringing innovations, which may increase the incentive to acquire the firm that holds them. At the same time, a broad patent is more likely to be legally challenged and infringed and less likely to survive a direct or indirect validity challenge; these factors affect the value the patent confers to its owner (Yiannaka & Fulton, 2006) and may influence their decision to transfer ownership.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4. See Yiannaka and Fulton (2006) Yiannaka and Fulton (2006). vation protected by the patent, patent characteristics can convey useful information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…vation protected by the patent, patent characteristics can convey useful information. Patent characteristics such as patent length (i.e., the statutory life of a patent) and patent breadth/scope (i.e., the technological territory protected by the patent) have been used in the study of optimal patent design (Gallini, 1992;Gilbert & Shapiro, 1990;Hopenhayn & Mitchell, 2001;Takalo, 2001), patenting and licensing behavior (Green & Schotchmer, 1995;Yiannaka & Fulton, 2006), the R&D process, and the pace of future innovations (Denicolo, 1996;Matutes, Regibeau, & Rocket, 1996;O'Donoghue, Scotchmer, & Thisse, 1998). A few empirical studies have tried to 'quantify' the scope/ breadth of a patent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation