IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v10y2001i2p317-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patenting and Licensing University Inventions: Lessons from the History of the Research Corporation

Author

Listed:
  • Mowery, David C
  • Sampat, Bhaven N

Abstract

Recent developments in the relationships between R&D in US industry and research in US universities, especially in the growth of university patenting and licensing of technologies to private firms, have attracted considerable attention. This paper discusses the history of an important institution in the history of these relationships, the Research Corporation. The ultimate withdrawal of the Research Corporation from its major role reflected shifting federal policies towards philanthropic organizations as well as the Bayh-Dole Act. The evidence provided in this paper, however, suggests that the seeds of decline had been planted well before 1980 and were apparent in the growing deficits of the Research Corporation during the 1970s. Since some of these factors are also apparent within many US university licensing offices it is likely that some "shake-out" will occur in the future as a number of these universities reduce or terminate their activities in this area. Those that survive are likely to pursue a broader set of goals than royalty income alone. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Mowery, David C & Sampat, Bhaven N, 2001. "Patenting and Licensing University Inventions: Lessons from the History of the Research Corporation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 317-355, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:10:y:2001:i:2:p:317-55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Antonelli, 2007. "Localized Technological Change," Chapters,in: Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 16 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Jozef Konings, 1997. "Financial Ratio Cross-section Dynamics: a Non-parametric Approach," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(9&10), pages 1331-1342.
    3. Stefano Comino & Fabio M. Manenti & Maria Laura Parisi, 2005. "From Planning to Mature: on the Determinants of Open Source Take Off," Department of Economics Working Papers 0517, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    4. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2005. "The Economics of Technology Sharing: Open Source and Beyond," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, pages 99-120.
    5. Quah, Danny, 1993. "Empirical cross-section dynamics in economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 426-434, April.
    6. Dosi, Giovanni, 1982. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 147-162.
    7. Roberto Ezcurra & Edro Pascual & Manuel Rapun, 2006. "The Dynamics of Industrial Concentration in the Regions of the European Union," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 200-229.
    8. Olsson, Ola & Frey, Bruno S, 2002. "Entrepreneurship as Recombinant Growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, pages 69-80.
    9. Olsson, Ola & Frey, Bruno S, 2002. "Entrepreneurship as Recombinant Growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, pages 69-80.
    10. Pierre Garrouste & Stavros Iaonnides, 2001. "Evolution and Path-Dependency in Economic Ideas: Past and Present," Post-Print halshs-00274526, HAL.
    11. Paola Giuri & Matteo Ploner & Francesco Rullani & Salvatore Torrisi, 2004. "Skills, Division of Labor and Performance in Collective Inventions. Evidence from the Open Source Software," LEM Papers Series 2004/19, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    12. Fingleton, Bernard, 1997. "Specification and Testing of Markov Chain Models: An Application to Convergence in the European Union," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 59(3), pages 385-403, August.
    13. Mario A. Maggioni, 2004. "The Dynamics of Open Source Software Communities and Industrial Districts : the Role of Market and Non-Market Interactions," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 107(1), pages 127-150.
    14. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 102-103.
    15. Shorrocks, A F, 1976. "Income Mobility and the Markov Assumption," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 86(343), pages 566-578, September.
    16. Kremer, Michael & Onatski, Alexei & Stock, James, 2001. "Searching for prosperity," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, pages 275-303.
    17. Paola Giuri & Gaia Rocchetti & Salvatore Torrisi, 2002. "Open Source Software: From Open Science to New Marketing Models," LEM Papers Series 2002/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Scott E. Page, 2007. "Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies," Introductory Chapters,in: The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies Princeton University Press.
    19. von Krogh, Georg & Spaeth, Sebastian & Lakhani, Karim R., 2003. "Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1217-1241.
    20. Dahlander, Linus & Wallin, Martin W., 2006. "A man on the inside: Unlocking communities as complementary assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1243-1259.
    21. Bode, Eckhardt, 1998. "Lokale Wissensdiffusion und regionale Divergenz in Deutschland," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 1038, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    22. Fabio M. Manenti & Stefano Comino & Marialaura Parisi, 2005. "From Planning to Mature: on the Determinants of Open Source Take-Off," Industrial Organization 0507006, EconWPA, revised 29 Sep 2005.
    23. Francesco Rullani, 2006. "Dragging developers towards the core," KITeS Working Papers 190, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Feb 2007.
    24. Bode, Eckhardt & Bickenbach, Frank, 2002. "Markov or not Markov - this should be a question," ERSA conference papers ersa02p024, European Regional Science Association.
    25. Jean-Michel Dalle & Paul David, 2005. "The Allocation of Software Development Resources In ‘Open Source’ Production Mode," Industrial Organization 0502011, EconWPA.
    26. Bickenbach, Frank & Bode, Eckhardt, 2001. "Markov or not Markov - this should be a question," Kiel Working Papers 1086, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    27. Juan Mateos Garcia & W. Edward Steinmueller, 2003. "The Open Source Way of Working: a New Paradigm for the Division of Labour in Software Development?," SPRU Working Paper Series 92, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    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. Colyvas, Jeannette A., 2007. "From divergent meanings to common practices: The early institutionalization of technology transfer in the life sciences at Stanford University," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 456-476.
    2. Balconi, Margherita & Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2004. "Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 127-145.
    3. David C. Mowery & Bhaven N. Sampat & Arvids A. Ziedonis, 2002. "Learning to Patent: Institutional Experience, Learning, and the Characteristics of U.S. University Patents After the Bayh-Dole Act, 1981-1992," Management Science, INFORMS, pages 73-89.
    4. Macdonald, Stuart, 2004. "When means become ends: considering the impact of patent strategy on innovation," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 135-158, March.
    5. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2009. "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1407-1422.
    6. Segarra-Blasco, Agusti­ & Arauzo-Carod, Josep-Maria, 2008. "Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1283-1295.
    7. Francesco Lissoni, 2013. "Intellectual property and university–industry technology transfer," Chapters,in: Public–Private Innovation Networks in Services, chapter 7, pages 164-194 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    9. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2006. "Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 772-789.
    10. Bhaven N. Sampat, 2015. "Intellectual property rights and pharmaceuticals: The case of antibiotics," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 26, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    11. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    12. David Mowery, 2011. "Nanotechnology and the US national innovation system: continuity and change," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 697-711, December.

    More about this item

    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:oup:indcch:v:10:y:2001:i:2:p:317-55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.