This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

• NEP-ALL-2004-01-12 (All new papers)
• NEP-LAW-2004-01-12 (Law & Economics)
• NEP-NET-2004-01-25 (Network Economics)
• NEP-TID-2004-01-12 (Technology & Industrial Dynamics)

1. Socio-Economics of Innovation

1. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
2. Lerner, Josh, 1995. "Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 463-95, October.
3. Jerry R. Green & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1995. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 20-33, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
   Other versions:
   • Green, J.R. & Scotchmer, S., 1993. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1638, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
4. Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J.H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff, 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," NBER Working Papers 9731, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
   Other versions:
   • Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J. H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Law and Economics 0401002, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
   • Bronwyn Hall & Stuart Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David Mowery, 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series 1054, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley. [Downloadable!]
   • Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Postgrant Opposition," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 115-144 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
5. Jonathan Levin & Richard Levin, . "Patent Oppositions," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1005, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy. [Downloadable!]
6. Jean O. Lanjouw & Iain Cockburn, 2000. "Do Patents Matter?: Empirical Evidence after GATT," NBER Working Papers 7495, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
7. Baldwin, John R. & Hanel, Peter & Sabourin, David, 2000. "Determinants of Innovative Activity in Canadian Manufacturing Firms: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 2000122e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch. [Downloadable!]
8. Jean Olson Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," NBER Working Papers 8656, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
9. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1988. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 862, Cowles Foundation, Yale University. [Downloadable!]
10. Petra Moser, 2003. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World Fairs," NBER Working Papers 9909, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
    • Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September. [Downloadable!]
11. Robert M. Hunt, 2001. "You can patent that? Are patents on computer programs and business methods good for the new economy?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Q1, pages 5-15. [Downloadable!]
12. Jean Olson Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 30, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE. [Downloadable!]
13. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1996. "Protecting Early Innovators: Should Second-Generation Products Be Patentable?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(2), pages 322-331, Summer. [Downloadable!] (restricted)

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

1. Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J.H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff, 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," NBER Working Papers 9731, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
   Other versions:
   • Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J. H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Law and Economics 0401002, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
   • Bronwyn Hall & Stuart Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David Mowery, 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series 1054, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley. [Downloadable!]
   • Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Postgrant Opposition," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 115-144 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!]
2. Stefan Wagner, 2004. "Business Method Patents in Europe and their Strategic Use – Evidence from Franking Device Manufacturers," Law and Economics 0410003, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
   Other versions:
   • Wagner, Stefan, 2006. "Business Method Patents in Europe and their Strategic Use - Evidence from Franking Device Manufacturers," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 1265, University of Munich, Munich School of Management. [Downloadable!]
   • Stefan Wagner, 2008. "Business Method Patents In Europe And Their Strategic Use - Evidence From Franking Device Manufacturers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 173-194. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
3. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2009. "Financial Patenting in Europe," NBER Working Papers 14714, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
4. Pollock, Rufus, 2006. "Innovation and Imitation with and without Intellectual Property Rights," MPRA Paper 5025, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Jul 2007. [Downloadable!]
5. Oecd, 2004. "Patents and Innovation: Trends and Policy Challenges," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000502, David K. Levine. [Downloadable!]
6. Bronwyn H. Hall & Megan MacGarvie, 2006. "The Private Value of Software Patents," NBER Working Papers 12195, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
7. Bronwyn H. Hall & Lee Manfred, 2007. "Innovation in non-bank payment systems," Proceedings – Payments System Research Conferences, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. [Downloadable!]
8. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2009. "Business and Financial Method Patents, Innovation, and Policy," NBER Working Papers 14868, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)