IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v28y2001i1p11-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patents in a world of complex technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Don E Kash
  • William Kingston

Abstract

The changes brought about by the Patent Act of 1952 were needed to adjust the administration of patents to the reality that invention and innovation now primarily result from investment rather than from individual creativity. An unintended result of these changes has been to make it difficult for firms in most non-chemical technologies and especially smaller firms involved in the innovation of complex technologies to obtain the protection they need. Also, denying firms in complex technologies the power to operate patent pools has forced them to multiply their patents as bargaining chips: these large numbers of interlocking patents effectively bar entry by newcomers to complex technologies, thus reducing competition. Reforms are possible and they could enable the patent system to fulfill its proper function in relation to complex technologies and transform the economic climate for small-firm innovation, replacing the patent system's present emphasis on serving large firms in simple technologies. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Don E Kash & William Kingston, 2001. "Patents in a world of complex technologies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 11-22, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:1:p:11-22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154301781781660
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frietsch, Rainer & Haller, Inna & Funken-Vrohlings, Melanie & Grupp, Hariolf, 2009. "Gender-specific patterns in patenting and publishing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 590-599, May.
    2. Reitzig, Markus & Henkel, Joachim & Heath, Christopher, 2007. "On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey--Unrealistic damage awards and firms' strategies of "being infringed"," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 134-154, February.
    3. repec:wfo:wstudy:36041 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    5. Knut Blind & Jakob Edler, 2003. "Idiosyncrasies of the Software Development Process and Their Relation to Software Patents: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 71-96, May.
    6. Frietsch, Rainer & Wang, Jue, 2007. "Intellectual property rights and innovation activities in China: evidence from patents and publications," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 13, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    7. Cevikarslan, Salih, 2013. "Optimal patent length and patent breadth in an R&D driven market with evolving consumer preferences: An evolutionary multi-agent based modelling approach," MERIT Working Papers 020, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    9. Suzuki, Jun, 2011. "Structural modeling of the value of patent," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 986-1000, September.
    10. Hashai, Niron & Almor, Tamar, 2008. "R&D intensity, value appropriation and integration patterns within organizational boundaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1022-1034, July.
    11. Joachim Henkel & Stefanie Pangerl, 2008. "Defensive Publishing An Empirical Study," DRUID Working Papers 08-04, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    12. Tang, Puay, 2005. "Digital copyright and the "new" controversy: Is the law moulding technology and innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 852-871, August.

    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:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:1:p:11-22. 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: .

    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.