Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The grace period in international patent law and its effect on the timing of disclosure

Contents:

Author Info

  • Franzoni, Chiara
  • Scellato, Giuseppe

Abstract

The paper applies a novel methodology to US and EPO patent data to assess how often the "general grace period" exception is used in the USA and the likely impact of international patent regulations that almost invariably deny such use on the pace of new disclosures in academia. Comparisons of average publication delays of European academic inventors show that the grace period accelerates knowledge communication and that variations are likely to depend on a lack of harmonisation of international legal systems, transaction costs and the presence of a firm among patent assignees.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V77-4Y7NDJ8-1/2/9f804ea81948648e0ddbb51bf7d2bffb
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Research Policy.

Volume (Year): 39 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Pages: 200-213

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:200-213

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol

Related research

Keywords: Grace period Patent system Academic patenting Knowledge dissemination;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, 04.
  2. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2003. "Are Faculty Critical? Their Role in University-Industry Licensing," NBER Working Papers 9991, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Calderini, Mario & Franzoni, Chiara & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2007. "If star scientists do not patent: The effect of productivity, basicness and impact on the decision to patent in the academic world," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 303-319, April.
  4. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2007. "University licensing," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 620-639, Winter.
  5. Sapsalis, Eleftherios & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Navon, Ran, 2006. "Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1631-1645, December.
  6. Harhoff, Dietmar & Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants--the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 443-480, April.
  7. Jensen, Richard A. & Thursby, Jerry G. & Thursby, Marie C., 2003. "Disclosure and licensing of University inventions: 'The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with'," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1271-1300, November.
  8. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
  9. James Bessen, 2006. "The Value of U.S. Patents by Owner and Patent Characteristics," Working Papers, Research on Innovation 0603, Research on Innovation.
  10. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2008. "Inventorship and Authorship in Patent-Publication Pairs: an Enquiry into the Economics of Scientific Credit," KITeS Working Papers, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy 224, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2008.
  11. Paula Stephan & Shiferaw Gurmu & Albert Sumell & Grant Black, 2007. "Who'S Patenting In The University? Evidence From The Survey Of Doctorate Recipients," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 71-99.
  12. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2005. "The Patent Litigation Explosion," Working Papers, Research on Innovation 0501, Research on Innovation.
  13. Palangkaraya, Alfons & Jensen, Paul H. & Webster, Elizabeth, 2008. "Applicant behaviour in patent examination request lags," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 243-245, December.
  14. Burke, Paul F. & Reitzig, Markus, 2007. "Measuring patent assessment quality--Analyzing the degree and kind of (in)consistency in patent offices' decision making," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1404-1430, November.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "The quality factor in patent systems," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(6), pages 1755-1793, December.
  2. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Matthis de Saint-Georges, 2011. "A Quality Index for Patent Systems," Working Papers ECARES, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles ECARES 2011-010, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  3. Caviggioli, Federico & Scellato, Giuseppe & Ughetto, Elisa, 2013. "International patent disputes: Evidence from oppositions at the European Patent Office," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1634-1646.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:200-213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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