IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/stieip/06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Under Threat: Potential Competition, Litigation and the Private Value of Patent Protection

Author

Listed:
  • Jean Olson Lanjouw

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of the threat and occurrence of patent litigation on the private value of patent protection. Potential challenges are introduced into a renewal model as a factor in patentee decisions as to whether a patent is worth maintaining. The model yields testable predictions about renewal probabilities. Data for post WWII German patents support the hypothesis that the need to defend patent rights influences patentee behaviour. The paper concludes with a discussion of how this factor may be incorporated in patent value estimations and what the results imply for the interpretation of patent data.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1992. "Under Threat: Potential Competition, Litigation and the Private Value of Patent Protection," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 06, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:stieip:06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/ei/ei6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Pakes, Ariel S, 1986. "Patents as Options: Some Estimates of the Value of Holding European Patent Stocks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 755-784, July.
    3. Michael J. Meurer, 1989. "The Settlement of Patent Litigation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(1), pages 77-91, Spring.
    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. Troy, Irene & Werle, Raymund, 2008. "Uncertainty and the market for patents," MPIfG Working Paper 08/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1993. "Patent Protection: Of What Value and for How Long?," NBER Working Papers 4475, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1994. "Economic Consequences of a Changing Litigation Environment: The Case of Patents," NBER Working Papers 4835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. John Sutton, 2001. "Rich Trades, Scarce Capabilities: Industrial Development Revisited," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 28, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.

    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. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    2. Mark Schankerman & Florian Schuett, 2022. "Patent Screening, Innovation, and Welfare [Innovation, Reallocation, and Growth]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(4), pages 2101-2148.
    3. Choi, Jay Pil, 1998. "Patent Litigation as an Information-Transmission Mechanism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1249-1263, December.
    4. Marc Baudry & Adrien Hervouet, 2017. "The private value of plant variety protection and the impact of exemption rules," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 202-226, April.
    5. Galai, Dan & Ilan, Yael, 1995. "Economic evaluation of remuneration from patents and technology transfers," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 4(2-3), pages 107-121.
    6. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, number 2009_041.
    7. ISOGAWA Daiya & NISHIKAWA Kohei & OHASHI Hiroshi, 2012. "New-to-Market Product Innovation and Firm Performance: Evidence from a firm-level innovation survey in Japan," Discussion papers 12077, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    8. Carlos J. Serrano, 2011. "Estimating the Gains from Trade in the Market for Innovation: Evidence from the Transfer of Patents," NBER Working Papers 17304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Choi, J.P., 1997. "Patent Litigation as an Information Transmission Mechanism," Other publications TiSEM a9afa43f-baa3-4e40-b599-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Gamarra, Yanis Luca & Friedl, Gunther, 2023. "Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    11. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Gambardella, Alfonso, 2023. "Private and social functions of patents: Innovation, markets, and new firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    13. Hussinger, Katrin & Pacher, Sebastian, 2019. "Information ambiguity, patents and the market value of innovative assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 665-675.
    14. Douglas Hanley, 2015. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," 2015 Meeting Papers 1491, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    15. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    16. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    17. Shilpi Tyagi & D. K. Nauriyal & Rachita Gulati, 2018. "Firm level R&D intensity: evidence from Indian drugs and pharmaceutical industry," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 167-202, January.
    18. Heidi L. Williams, 2017. "How Do Patents Affect Research Investments?," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 441-469, September.
    19. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Brent Goldfarb & Scott Shane & Marie Thursby, 2008. "Appropriability and Commercialization: Evidence from MIT Inventions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 893-906, May.
    20. Marco, Alan C., 2005. "The option value of patent litigation: Theory and evidence," Review of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3-4), pages 323-351.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patents; patent litigation; patent value estimations; litigation; patentee behaviour.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cep:stieip:06. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/ .

    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.