IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/iburev/v28y2019i53.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

National treatment, institutions and IP uncertainties: An analytics of compliance, change and comparability

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Deli

Abstract

This paper addresses national treatment for IP uncertainties (NTIPU) as to whether it is upheld, its changing nature, and differences between patents and trademarks. Based on the institutional theory, empirical evidence in the US and China, the lagged regression modeling of longitudinal data, and multiple comparison, we find that NTIPU is upheld in the past 12 years for trademarks due to equal or favorable treatment for foreigners in granting for both countries, and in pendency for China, but not upheld against pendency due to shorter duration for US locals. Both countries show progress (pendency and foreign granting in China, US granting) or remain unchanged (local granting in China, and US pendency) when compared with pre-2002 eras. Consistently, patents demonstrate shorter pendency but lower granting than trademarks for both countries. The findings address theoretical and empirical voids of NTIPU and provide implications to handle IP uncertainties in bilateral collaboration.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Deli, 2019. "National treatment, institutions and IP uncertainties: An analytics of compliance, change and comparability," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:iburev:v:28:y:2019:i:5:3
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.05.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593118302750
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.05.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yang, Deli & Sonmez, Mahmut, 2013. "Integration and divergence of patent systems across national and international institutions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 527-538.
    2. Paul D. Bush, 1987. "The Theory of Institutional Change," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 1075-1116, September.
    3. Douglass C. North, 1991. "Institutions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 97-112, Winter.
    4. Suzanne Scotchmer, 2004. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 415-437, October.
    5. Henrik Horn, 2006. "National Treatment in the GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 394-404, March.
    6. Fu, Xiaolan & Sun, Zhongjuan & Ghauri, Pervez N., 2018. "Reverse knowledge acquisition in emerging market MNEs: The experiences of Huawei and ZTE," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 202-215.
    7. Difei Geng & Kamal Saggi, 2018. "Is there a case for non-discrimination in the international protection of intellectual property?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 5, pages 109-123, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Kathleen Liddell & Michael Waibel, 2016. "Fair and Equitable Treatment and Judicial Patent Decisions," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 145-174.
    9. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen & Alfons Palangkaraya, 2014. "Patent examination outcomes and the national treatment principle," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 449-469, June.
    10. Yang, Deli & Sonmez, Mahmut (Maho), 2018. "Global norm of national treatment for patent uncertainties: A longitudinal comparison between the US and China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 164-176.
    11. Lorraine Eden, 2010. "Letter from the Editor-in-Chief: Lifting the veil on how institutions matter in IB research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 41(2), pages 175-177, February.
    12. Popp David & Juhl Ted & Johnson Daniel K.N., 2004. "Time In Purgatory: Examining the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-45, November.
    13. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1992. "Multilateralism: the anatomy of an institution," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 561-598, July.
    14. Masaaki Kotabe, 1992. "A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Patent Systems," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 23(1), pages 147-168, March.
    15. Christine Oliver, 1997. "Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource‐based views," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(9), pages 697-713, October.
    16. Yang, Deli, 2005. "Culture matters to multinationals' intellectual property businesses," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 281-301, August.
    17. Sánchez-Sellero, Pedro & Rosell-Martínez, Jorge & García-Vázquez, José Manuel, 2014. "Absorptive capacity from foreign direct investment in Spanish manufacturing firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 429-439.
    18. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
    19. Pillai, Rajesh, 2002. "National Treatment and WTO Dispute Settlement," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 321-343, November.
    20. Yang, Deli, 2008. "Pendency and grant ratios of invention patents: A comparative study of the US and China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1035-1046, July.
    21. Bosworth, Derek & Yang, Deli, 2000. "Intellectual property law, technology flow and licensing opportunities in the People's Republic of China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 453-477, August.
    22. Deli Yang, 2013. "Understanding and Profiting from Intellectual Property," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, edition 2, number 978-1-137-09466-7.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Molin & Yan, Haifeng & Ciabuschi, Francesco & Su, Cong, 2023. "Facilitator or inhibitor? The effect of host-country intellectual property rights protection on China’s technology-driven acquisitions," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(6).
    2. Cavusgil, S. Tamer & Deligonul, Seyda & Ghauri, Pervez N. & Bamiatzi, Vassiliki & Park, Byung Il & Mellahi, Kamel, 2020. "Risk in international business and its mitigation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    3. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 2020. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 349-366, December.
    4. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 0. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-18.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Deli & Sonmez, Mahmut (Maho), 2018. "Global norm of national treatment for patent uncertainties: A longitudinal comparison between the US and China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 164-176.
    2. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 2020. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 349-366, December.
    3. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Reza Hosseini, 0. "Discrimination against foreigners in the U.S. patent system," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-18.
    4. Tong, Tony W. & Zhang, Kun & He, Zi-Lin & Zhang, Yuchen, 2018. "What determines the duration of patent examination in China? An outcome-specific duration analysis of invention patent applications at SIPO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 583-591.
    5. Zhang, Gupeng & Xiong, Libin & Duan, Hongbo & Huang, Dujuan, 2020. "Obtaining certainty vs. creating uncertainty: Does firms’ patent filing strategy work as expected?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Liegsalz, Johannes & Wagner, Stefan, 2013. "Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 552-563.
    7. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Emilio Raiteri, 2022. "Technology Protectionism and the Patent System: Evidence from China," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 1-43, March.
    8. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    9. Li Yao & He Ni, 2023. "Prediction of patent grant and interpreting the key determinants: an application of interpretable machine learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 4933-4969, September.
    10. Yang, Deli, 2007. "The impact of business environments on software piracy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 121-141.
    11. Fei Yu & Yanrui Wu & Jin Chen & Arie Y. Lewin, 2023. "Technological leapfrogging and country strategic patent policy," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(5), pages 887-909, July.
    12. Elise Petit & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie & Lluis Gimeno-Fabra, 2022. "Global patent systems: Revisiting the national bias hypothesis," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 56-67, March.
    13. Dirk Dohse & Rajeev K. Goel & James W. Saunoris, 2023. "Patenting uncertainty and its impact on innovation: evidence from the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1839-1859, October.
    14. Yang, Deli & Sonmez, Mahmut, 2013. "Integration and divergence of patent systems across national and international institutions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 527-538.
    15. Geng, Difei & Saggi, Kamal, 2022. "Tariff barriers and the protection of intellectual property in the global economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    16. Yang, Deli, 2008. "Pendency and grant ratios of invention patents: A comparative study of the US and China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1035-1046, July.
    17. Difei Geng & Kamal Saggi, 2018. "Is there a case for non-discrimination in the international protection of intellectual property?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 5, pages 109-123, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Lehmann-Hasemeyer, Sibylle H. & Streb, Jochen, 2018. "Discrimination against Foreigners. The Wuerttemberg Patent Law in Administrative Practice," Working Papers 7, German Research Foundation's Priority Programme 1859 "Experience and Expectation. Historical Foundations of Economic Behaviour", Humboldt University Berlin.
    19. Kamal Saggi, 2016. "Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 16-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    20. Luis Alfonso Dau & Aya S. Chacar & Marjorie A. Lyles & Jiatao Li, 2022. "Informal institutions and international business: Toward an integrative research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(6), pages 985-1010, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:iburev:v:28:y:2019:i:5:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/133/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.