IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/18671.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Zum Nutzen internationaler Standards bei der Vergabe von Genpatenten - Eine vergleichende Analyse am Beispiel der EU und Japans
[The benefits of international standards in the awarding of genetic patents - A comparative analysis between the EU and Japan]

Author

Listed:
  • Gilroy, Bernard Michael
  • Vollpert, Tobias

Abstract

The specific characteristics of the R&D system of the modern molecular biotechnology lead to the fact that patent protection for genetic inventions cause almost simultaneously an useful information effect as well as a harmful blocking effect. Within this context, the present papers shows that the current attempts of the U.S., Japan, and the EU to establish consistent standards for patents in the area of genetic engineering, are only scarcely reasonable. Due to national distinctions of cultural and traditional conditions with view to the allocation and usage of property rights, an optimal patent system in Japan is not identical to one in Europe or the U.S.

Suggested Citation

  • Gilroy, Bernard Michael & Vollpert, Tobias, 2003. "Zum Nutzen internationaler Standards bei der Vergabe von Genpatenten - Eine vergleichende Analyse am Beispiel der EU und Japans [The benefits of international standards in the awarding of genetic p," MPRA Paper 18671, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:18671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/18671/1/MPRA_paper_18671.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, December.
    2. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 11688, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Guido Cozzi, 2009. "Intellectual Property, Innovation, And Growth: Introduction To The Special Issue," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 383-389, September.
    4. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    5. Gerard Llobet & Javier Suarez, 2010. "Entrepreneurial Innovation, Patent Protection and Industry Dynamics," Working Papers wp2010_1001, CEMFI.
    6. Vidyanand Choudhary & Mingdi Xin & Zhe Zhang, 2023. "Sequential IT Investment: Can the Risk of IT Implementation Failure Be Your Friend?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1017-1044, September.
    7. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    8. Lee Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley, 2005. "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Data," NBER Working Papers 11516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    10. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2018. "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low‐quality patents?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 134-148, March.
    13. Hanna Hottenrott & Bronwyn H. Hall & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2016. "Patents as quality signals? The implications for financing constraints on R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 197-217, April.
    14. Stienstra, Miranda, 2020. "The determinants and performance implications of alliance partner acquisition," Other publications TiSEM 7fdee0c2-d4d2-4f5b-95e3-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2006. "Patents vs. Trade Secrets: Knowledge Licensing and Spillover," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(6), pages 1112-1147, December.
    16. Langinier, Corinne & Marcoul, Philippe, 2009. "Contributory infringement rule and patents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 296-310, May.
    17. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    18. Sebastian von Engelhardt & Sushmita Swaminathan, 2008. "Open Source Software, Closed Source Software or Both: Impacts on Industry Growth and the Role of Intellectual Property Rights," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 799, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Rauch, James E., 2016. "Dynastic entrepreneurship, entry, and non-compete enforcement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 188-201.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patents; biotechnology; international harmonization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law

    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:pra:mprapa:18671. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.