French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property
AbstractIn attempting to protect their innovations, firms can choose from a range of mechanisms, which may be either non-statutory (trade secrets, design complexity, and lead-time advantage over competitors) or statutory (patent, design registration, trademark, copyright). Yet, little is known about how firms do actually make their choices from among these different appropriability mechanisms. The aim of this paper is to determine how French firms’ use of intellectual property protection mechanisms relates to the type of innovation, the characteristics of the market sector in which they operate, the firms’ characteristics, and their human resources strategies. Our empirical model draws on four French databases covering the period 2001–2004. Our results show that the choice of a means of protection matters and emerges out of a complex strategy. Our results also reveal that the different statutory and non-statutory means of protection are complementary within their own categories but hardly so between categories.
Download InfoIf 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.
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 InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Research Policy.
Volume (Year): 41 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol
Appropriability; Intellectual property rights; Innovation; Human resources strategies; Multivariate probit;
Other versions of this item:
- Legros, Diego & Gallié, Emilie-Pauline, 2012. "French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/5000, Paris Dauphine University.
- O34 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
- O32 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
- C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
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.:
- Petr Hanel, 2008. "The Use Of Intellectual Property Rights And Innovation By Manufacturing Firms In Canada," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 285-309.
- Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3), pages 783-832.
- Keld Laursen & Volker Mahnke, .
"Knowledge strategies, firm types, and complementarity in human-resource practices,"
IVS/CBS Working Papers
00-8, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy, Copenhagen Business School.
- Keld Laursen & Volker Mahnke, 2001. "Knowledge Strategies, Firm Types, and Complementarity in Human-Resource Practices," Journal of Management and Governance, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-27, March.
- Katrin Hussinger, 2006.
"Is Silence Golden? Patents Versus Secrecy At The Firm Level,"
Economics of Innovation and New Technology,
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(8), pages 735-752.
- Hussinger, Katrin, 2005. "Is Silence Golden? Patents versus Secrecy at the Firm Level," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 37, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
- Hussinger, Katrin, 2004. "Is Silence Golden? Patents versus Secrecy at the Firm Level," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-78, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 1997. "Keeping Organizational Secrets: Protective Institutional Mechanisms and Their Costs," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 623-63, September.
- Suzanne Scotchmer & Jerry Green, 1990. "Novelty and Disclosure in Patent Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 131-146, Spring.
- Harabi, N., 1993.
"Appropriabiblity of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis,"
31a, Universitat Zurich - Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Institut.
- Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
- Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Appropriability of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," MPRA Paper 26267, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Mendonca, Sandro & Pereira, Tiago Santos & Godinho, Manuel Mira, 2004.
"Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change,"
Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1385-1404, November.
- Sandro Mendonça & Tiago Santos Pereira & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2004. "Trademarks as an Indicator of Innovation and Industrial Change," LEM Papers Series 2004/15, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
- Wesley M Cohen & Richard R Nelson & John P Walsh, 2003.
"Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not),"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
618897000000000624, David K. Levine.
- Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Horstmann, Ignatius & MacDonald, Glenn M & Slivinski, Alan, 1985. "Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms: To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 837-58, October.
- Jinyoung Kim & Gerald Marschke, 2005.
"Labor Mobility of Scientists, Technological Diffusion, and the Firm's Patenting Decision,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(2), pages 298-317, Summer.
- Gerald Marschke & Jinyoung Kim, 2001. "Labor Mobility of Scientists, Technological Diffusion, and the Firm's Patenting Decision," Discussion Papers 01-03, University at Albany, SUNY, Department of Economics.
- Galia, Fabrice & Legros, Diego, 2004. "Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1185-1199, October.
- Cooper, David P., 2001. "Innovation and reciprocal externalities: information transmission via job mobility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 403-425, August.
- Ashish Arora, 1996.
"Patents, Licensing, And Market Structure In The Chemical Industry,"
- Arora, Ashish, 1997. "Patents, licensing, and market structure in the chemical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 391-403, December.
- James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
- Schmookler, Jacob, 1962. "Economic Sources of Inventive Activity," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(01), pages 1-20, March.
- Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1994. "The Firm as an Incentive System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 972-91, September.
- Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
- Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
- Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
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.