IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/f/pdu375.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Anne Duchene

Personal Details

First Name:Anne
Middle Name:
Last Name:Duchene
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:pdu375
[This author has chosen not to make the email address public]
https://sites.google.com/site/anneduchenesite/

Affiliation

(50%) School of Economics
LeBow College of Business
Drexel University

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (United States)
http://www.lebow.drexel.edu/Faculty/Departments/Economics/
RePEc:edi:dedreus (more details at EDIRC)

(50%) Institut de Préparation à l'Administration et à la Gestion (IPAG)

Paris, France
http://www.ipag.edu/
RePEc:edi:ipagpfr (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles Chapters

Working papers

  1. Anne Duchêne, 2015. "Patent Litigation Insurance," Working Papers 2015-621, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
  2. Bernard Caillaud & Anne Duchene, 2009. "Patent Office in innovation policy: Nobody's perfect," PSE Working Papers halshs-00575019, HAL.

Articles

  1. Anne Duchêne & Debapriya Sen & Konstantinos Serfes, 2015. "Patent Licensing and Entry Deterrence: The Role of Low Royalties," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1324-1348, December.
  2. Anne Duchêne & Konstantinos Serfes, 2012. "Patent Settlements as a Barrier to Entry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 399-429, June.
  3. 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.
  4. Duchene, Anne & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2006. "The legal and technological battle in the music industry: Information-push versus information-pull technologies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 565-580, December.

Chapters

  1. Anne Duchene & Patrick Waelbroeck, 2005. "Peer-to-peer, piracy and the copyright law: implications for consumers and artists," Chapters, in: Lisa N. Takeyama & Wendy J. Gordon & Ruth Towse (ed.), Developments in the Economics of Copyright, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Anne Duchêne, 2015. "Patent Litigation Insurance," Working Papers 2015-621, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.

    Cited by:

    1. Bernhard Ganglmair & Christian Helmers & Brian J Love, 2022. "The Effect of Patent Litigation Insurance: Theory and Evidence from NPEs [“Valuable Patents]," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 741-773.
    2. Jorge Lemus & Emil Temnyalov & John L. Turner, 2019. "Liability Insurance: Equilibrium Contracts under Monopoly and Competition," Working Paper Series 2019/11, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.

  2. Bernard Caillaud & Anne Duchene, 2009. "Patent Office in innovation policy: Nobody's perfect," PSE Working Papers halshs-00575019, HAL.

    Cited by:

    1. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2020. "Patent Screening, Innovation, and Welfare," Discussion Paper 2020-024, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    2. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 11688, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Schankerman, Mark & Schütt, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality : Examination, Fees, and the Courts," Discussion Paper 2016-036, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    4. Andreea Cosnita & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2006. "On the Effective Design of the Efficiency Defence," Post-Print halshs-00113503, HAL.
    5. 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).
    6. Comino, Stefano & Graziano, Clara, 2015. "How many patents does it take to signal innovation quality?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 66-79.
    7. Johannes Koenen & Martin Peitz, 2011. "The Economics of Pending Patents," CESifo Working Paper Series 3657, CESifo.
    8. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The quality factor in patent systems," CEPR Discussion Papers 7921, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2015. "Are Patent Fees Effective at Weeding Out Low-Quality Patents?," Working Papers 15_01, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    10. Koenen, Johannes & Peitz, Martin, 2015. "Firm reputation and incentives to “milk” pending patents," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 18-29.
    11. Eckert, Andrew & Langinier, Corinne, 2014. "A Survey of the Economics of Patent Systems and Procedures," Working Papers 2014-10, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    12. Schuett, F., 2012. "Inventors and Imposters : An Analysis of Patent Examination with Self-Selection of Firms into R&D," Other publications TiSEM cb800431-1d66-4a59-89ef-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Langinier, Corinne & Marcoul, Philippe, 2007. "Patents, Search of Prior Art, and Revelation of Information," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10489, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Yamauchi, Isamu & Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男, 2013. "Does the outsourcing of prior art search increase the efficiency of patent examination?," IIR Working Paper 13-12, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    15. Christian Le Bas & Julien Pénin, 2014. "Patents and innovation : Are the brakes broken, or how to restore patents’ dynamic efficiency ?," Working Papers of BETA 2014-02, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    16. 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.
    17. Yamauchi, Isamu & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2015. "Does the outsourcing of prior art search increase the efficiency of patent examination? Evidence from Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1601-1614.
    18. Vidya Atal & Talia Bar, 2014. "Patent Quality and a Two-Tiered Patent System," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 503-540, September.
    19. Zhu, Kejia & Malhotra, Shavin & Li, Yaohan, 2022. "Technological diversity of patent applications and decision pendency," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    20. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Do remedies affect the efficiency defense? An optimal merger-control analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-66.
    21. 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).
    22. Marco, Alan C. & Sarnoff, Joshua D. & deGrazia, Charles A.W., 2019. "Patent claims and patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    23. Régibeau, P & Rockett, K & Mariam, S, 2012. "Patent Pendency, Learning Effects, and Innovation Importance at the US Patent Office," Economics Discussion Papers 2863, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    24. Kim, Yee Kyoung & Oh, Jun Byoung, 2017. "Examination workloads, grant decision bias and examination quality of patent office," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 1005-1019.

Articles

  1. Anne Duchêne & Debapriya Sen & Konstantinos Serfes, 2015. "Patent Licensing and Entry Deterrence: The Role of Low Royalties," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1324-1348, December.

    Cited by:

    1. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2016. "License or entry in oligopoly," MPRA Paper 73578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2018. "License and Entry Strategies for an Outside Innovator Under Duopoly with Combination of Royalty and Fixed Fee," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 485-502, December.
    3. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "Royalty and license fee under vertical differentiation in oligopoly with or without entry of innovator: Two-step auction," MPRA Paper 78859, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2018. "License and Entry Strategies for an Outside Innovator Under Duopoly," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 4(1), pages 135-152, March.
    5. Liu Yao & Mukherjee Arijit, 2024. "Lobbying for Tariff Protection, International Technology Licensing and Consumer Surplus," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 24(1), pages 117-139, January.
    6. Montez, João & Marxen, Annabelle, 2020. "Licensing at the patent cliff and market entry," CEPR Discussion Papers 14276, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "Vertical differentiation in oligopoly and license fees when outside innovator can enter the market: Two-step auction," MPRA Paper 78987, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2020. "License Fees in Oligopoly When Outside Innovator can Enter the Market: Two-Step Auction," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-15, September.
    9. Xiaodong Yuan & Weiling Song, 2022. "Evaluating technology innovation capabilities of companies based on entropy- TOPSIS: the case of solar cell companies," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 65-76, June.
    10. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "License and entry decision for innovating firm in international duopoly under vertical differentiation," MPRA Paper 78995, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2020. "Entry of Innovator and License in Oligopoly," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 709-731, December.
    12. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2017. "License or Entry in Duopoly with Quality Improving Innovation: Alternative Definitions of License Fee," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2021. "License and entry strategies for an outside innovator in Stackelberg duopoly with royalty and fixed fee under vertical differentiation," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 17(3), pages 234-257, September.
    14. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2016. "Revenue royalties," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 47-76, May.
    15. Sinha, Uday Bhanu, 2016. "Optimal value of a patent in an asymmetric Cournot duopoly market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 93-105.
    16. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "License and entry strategies for outside innovator in duopoly," MPRA Paper 76444, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "License and entry strategies for an outside innovator in duopoly with combination of royalty and fixed fee under vertical differentiation," MPRA Paper 78856, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Carlo Capuano & Iacopo Grassi, 2020. "Imperfect patent protection, licensing, and willingness to pay for the innovation," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 47(2), pages 333-359, June.
    19. Li, Hai & Qing, Qiankai & Wang, Juan & Hong, Xianpei, 2021. "An analysis of technology licensing and parallel importation under different market structures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 132-143.
    20. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "License or entry decision for innovator in international duopoly with convex cost functions," MPRA Paper 78996, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Carlo Capuano & Iacopo Grassi, 2019. "Imperfect patent protection, licensing, and Social Welfare," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2639-2649.
    22. Hattori, Masahiko & Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2017. "Royalty and license fee under oligopoly with or without entry of innovator: Two-step auction," MPRA Paper 78858, University Library of Munich, Germany.

  2. Anne Duchêne & Konstantinos Serfes, 2012. "Patent Settlements as a Barrier to Entry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 399-429, June.

    Cited by:

    1. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2015. "Patent Licensing with Bertrand Competitors," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(1), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2016. "Revenue royalties," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 47-76, May.
    3. Manganelli, Anton-Giulio, 2023. "Pay-for-delay settlements and patent expansion practices," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. Krasteva, Silvana & Sharma, Priyanka & Wang, Chu, 2020. "Patent policy, imitation incentives, and the rate of cumulative innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 509-533.

  3. 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.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  4. Duchene, Anne & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2006. "The legal and technological battle in the music industry: Information-push versus information-pull technologies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 565-580, December.

    Cited by:

    1. Žigić, Krešimir & Střelický, Jiří & Kúnin, Michael, 2023. "Copyright and firms’ own IPR protection in a software market: Monopoly versus duopoly," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    2. Maya Bacache-Beauvallet & Marc Bourreau & François Moreau, 2015. "Piracy and creation: the case of the music industry," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 245-262, April.
    3. Xinyu Hua & Kathryn E. Spier, 2021. "Settling Lawsuits with Pirates," HKUST CEP Working Papers Series 202104, HKUST Center for Economic Policy.
    4. Francisco Martinez, 2008. "Learning by Copying," ThE Papers 08/05, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    5. Adermon, Adrian & Liang, Che-Yuan, 2010. "Piracy, Music, and Movies: A Natural Experiment," Working Paper Series, Center for Fiscal Studies 2010:13, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    6. Martínez-Sánchez, Francisco, 2010. "Lobbyin to prevent commercial piracy," UMUFAE Economics Working Papers 13255, DIGITUM. Universidad de Murcia.
    7. Dyuti Banerjee & Ishita Chatterjee, 2009. "On the Impact of Piracy on Innovation in the Presence of Technological and Market Uncertainty," Monash Economics Working Papers 26-09, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    8. Adermon, Adrian & Liang, Che-Yuan, 2014. "Piracy and music sales: The effects of an anti-piracy law," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 90-106.
    9. Dyuti S. Banerjee, 2014. "Effectiveness of government anti-piracy enforcement policy: commitment versus non-commitment," Chapters, in: Richard Watt (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Copyright, chapter 15, pages 264-284, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. BELLEFLAMME, Paul & PEITZ, Martin, 2010. "Digital piracy : theory," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2010060, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    11. Thomes, Tim Paul, 2011. "An economic analysis of online streaming. How the music industry can generate revenues from cloud computing," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Dyuti Banerjee, 2011. "On the sufficiency of regulatory enforcement in combating piracy," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 160-176, October.
    13. Vecco, Marilena & Georgantzis, Nikos & Kroonenberg, Pieter, 2022. "Is it the firm, the innovator, or the innovation? Determinants of perceived non-imitability leading to unprotected intellectual property," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    14. Warr, Richard & Goode, Mark M.H., 2011. "Is the music industry stuck between rock and a hard place? The role of the Internet and three possible scenarios," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 126-131.
    15. Thomes, Tim Paul, 2013. "An economic analysis of online streaming music services," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 81-91.
    16. Xinyu Hua & Kathryn E. Spier, 2023. "Settling Lawsuits With Pirates," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(2), pages 543-575, May.
    17. Patrick Waelbroeck, 2013. "Digital music," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse & Christian Handke (ed.), Handbook on the Digital Creative Economy, chapter 34, pages 389-398, Edward Elgar Publishing.

Chapters

  1. Anne Duchene & Patrick Waelbroeck, 2005. "Peer-to-peer, piracy and the copyright law: implications for consumers and artists," Chapters, in: Lisa N. Takeyama & Wendy J. Gordon & Ruth Towse (ed.), Developments in the Economics of Copyright, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Cited by:

    1. Maija Halonen-Akatwijuka & Tobias Regner, 2009. "Digital Technology and the Allocation of Ownership in the Music Industry," Jena Economics Research Papers 2009-096, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. Takeyama, Lisa N., 2009. "Copyright enforcement and product quality signaling in markets for computer software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 291-296, November.
    3. Peitz, Martin & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2006. "Why the music industry may gain from free downloading -- The role of sampling," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 907-913, September.
    4. Debabrata Dey & Antino Kim & Atanu Lahiri, 2019. "Online Piracy and the “Longer Arm” of Enforcement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1173-1190, March.

More information

Research fields, statistics, top rankings, if available.

Statistics

Access and download statistics for all items

Co-authorship network on CollEc

NEP Fields

NEP is an announcement service for new working papers, with a weekly report in each of many fields. This author has had 1 paper announced in NEP. These are the fields, ordered by number of announcements, along with their dates. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for this field, a link is also provided.
  1. NEP-IAS: Insurance Economics (1) 2015-02-28
  2. NEP-IND: Industrial Organization (1) 2015-02-28
  3. NEP-IPR: Intellectual Property Rights (1) 2015-02-28
  4. NEP-LAW: Law and Economics (1) 2015-02-28

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. For general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions.

To update listings or check citations waiting for approval, Anne Duchene should log into the RePEc Author Service.

To make corrections to the bibliographic information of a particular item, find the technical contact on the abstract page of that item. There, details are also given on how to add or correct references and citations.

To link different versions of the same work, where versions have a different title, use this form. Note that if the versions have a very similar title and are in the author's profile, the links will usually be created automatically.

Please note that most corrections can 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.