IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v186y2023ipas0040162522006266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

IP dLedger - Decentralized ledger for intellectual property administration

Author

Listed:
  • Nam, Ji-Hyun
  • Lee, Sun-Jae
  • Park, Sung-Pil
  • Lee, Il-Gu

Abstract

With the rapid growth of big data, the applications of intellectual property (IP) rights and prior art documents are increasing rapidly. Patent examiners are usually overworked to evaluate inventions referring to a large volume of prior arts in a short period. Such increasing workloads and documents may cause administrative inefficiencies and generate low-quality IPs that hamper technological innovation. Moreover, today's centralized IP administration system is inefficient in processing speed, security, and cost. Inefficiencies of IP administration in each national IP office impede speedy and efficient cooperation for international application and registration. This study proposes an IP decentralized ledger (IP dLedger) based on the blockchain to significantly reduce IP administration costs and improve IP use. IP dLedger connects the on-chain (blockchain) to the off-chain (centralized database) systems using IP codes that combine hash values and timestamps. Similar to the web hypertext method, this connective feature of IP dLedger enables users who click on identification information registered in a blockchain network to access, through a hyperlink, a centralized database of enormous volumes of related IP information. Therefore, IP dLedger can reduce IP administration costs, increase IP usage, and facilitate safe and convenient use of the IP data.

Suggested Citation

  • Nam, Ji-Hyun & Lee, Sun-Jae & Park, Sung-Pil & Lee, Il-Gu, 2023. "IP dLedger - Decentralized ledger for intellectual property administration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:186:y:2023:i:pa:s0040162522006266
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522006266
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122105?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    2. Caillaud, Bernard & Duchêne, Anne, 2011. "Patent office in innovation policy: Nobody's perfect," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 242-252, March.
    3. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Helmers, Christian, 2019. "The impact of international patent systems: Evidence from accession to the European Patent Convention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    4. Gene M. Grossman & Edwin L.-C. Lai, 2004. "International Protection of Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1635-1653, December.
    5. Machlup, Fritz & Penrose, Edith, 1950. "The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, May.
    6. Bernard Caillaud & Anne Duchêne, 2011. "Patent Office and Innovation Policy: Nobody's perfect," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-00754554, HAL.
    7. McCalman, Phillip, 2001. "Reaping what you sow: an empirical analysis of international patent harmonization," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 161-186, October.
    8. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2008. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 982-997, May.
    9. Briggs, Kristie, 2013. "Does patent harmonization impact the decision and volume of high technology trade?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 35-51.
    10. Lemley, Mark A & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Patent Hold-Up and Royalty Stacking," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt8638s257, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    11. Boeing, Philipp & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2016. "Measuring patent quality in cross-country comparison," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 145-147.
    12. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2007. "Patents and patent policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 568-587, Winter.
    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. Burk, Dan L. & Lemley, Mark, 2003. "Policy Levers in Patent Law," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt4qr081sg, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    15. Tufool Alnuaimi & Gerard George, 2016. "Appropriability and the retrieval of knowledge after spillovers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1263-1279, July.
    16. Joshua S. Gans & Scott Stern, 2010. "Is there a market for ideas?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 805-837, June.
    17. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 2008. "How Strong Are Weak Patents?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1347-1369, September.
    18. David Popp & Ted Juhl & Daniel K.N. Johnson, 2003. "Time in Purgatory: Determinants of the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," NBER Working Papers 9518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Mariagrazia Squicciarini & Hélène Dernis & Chiara Criscuolo, 2013. "Measuring Patent Quality: Indicators of Technological and Economic Value," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/3, OECD Publishing.
    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. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier, 2014. "A Survey Of The Economics Of Patent Systems And Procedures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 996-1015, December.
    2. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Bronwyn H Hall, 2019. "Is there a role for patents in the financing of new innovative firms?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(3), pages 657-680.
    7. Fei Yu & Yanrui Wu & Jin Chen & Arie Y. Lewin, 2023. "Technological leapfrogging and country strategic patent policy," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(5), pages 887-909, July.
    8. Fei Yu & Yanrui Wu & Jin Chen & Arie Lewin, 2022. "Technological Leapfrogging and Strategic Patent Policy," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 22-17, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    9. NAGAOKA Sadao & YAMAUCHI Isamu, 2017. "Information Constraint of the Patent Office and Examination Quality: Evidence from the effects of initiation lags," Discussion papers 17040, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    10. Di Fan & Long Zhao, 2022. "Old Wine in New Bottles: Patenting Propensity," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 207-224, June.
    11. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 11688, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    13. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    14. Carlos J. Serrano & Rosemarie Ziedonis, 2018. "How Redeployable are Patent Assets? Evidence from Failed Startups," NBER Working Papers 24526, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Maria Isabella Leone & Raffaele Oriani & Toke Reichstein, 2015. "How much are flexibility and uncertainty worth in patent licensing?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 42(4), pages 371-394, December.
    16. Schankerman, Mark & Schütt, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality : Examination, Fees, and the Courts," Other publications TiSEM fa319822-6e68-4e05-8547-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "The quality factor in patent systems," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(6), pages 1755-1793, December.
    18. Mathias Dewatripont & Patrick Legros, 2013. "‘Essential’ Patents, FRAND Royalties and Technological Standards," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 913-937, December.
    19. GianCarlo Moschini, 2004. "Intellectual Property Rights and the World Trade Organization: Retrospect and Prospects," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 19, pages 474-511, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Paul Oldham & Stephen Hall & Oscar Forero, 2013. "Biological Diversity in the Patent System," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-16, November.

    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:eee:tefoso:v:186:y:2023:i:pa:s0040162522006266. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.