Patent Policy, Patent Pools, And The Accumulation Of Claims In Sequential Innovation
We present a dynamic model where the accumulation of patents generates an increasing number of claims on sequential innovation. We compare innovation activity under three regimes patents,no-patents,andpatentpoolsand ﬁnd that none of them can reach the ﬁrst best. We ﬁnd that the ﬁrst best can be reached through a decentralized tax-subsidy mechanism, by which innovators receive a subsidy when they innovate, and are taxed with subsequent innovations. This ﬁnding implies that optimal transfers work in the exact opposite way as traditional patents. Finally, we consider patents of ﬁnite duration and determine the optimal patent length.
|Date of creation:||Nov 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +34 93 542-1222
Fax: +34 93 542-1223
Web page: http://www.barcelonagse.eu
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2004.
"Efficient Patent Pools,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 691-711, June.
- 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.
- Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2005.
"The economics of ideas and intellectual property,"
357, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
- 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.
- 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.
- Howard F. Chang, 1995. "Patent Scope, Antitrust Policy, and Cumulative Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 34-57, Spring.
- Gaston Llanes & Stefano Trento, 2007.
"Anticommons and optimal patent policy in a model of sequential innovation,"
Economics Working Papers
we076838, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.
- Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
- Gastón Llanes & Stefano Trento, 2009. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," Harvard Business School Working Papers 09-148, Harvard Business School.
- Bengt Holmstrom, 1982.
"Moral Hazard in Teams,"
Bell Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 324-340, Autumn.
- Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques-François Thisse, 1998.
"Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress,"
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, 03.
- O'DONOGHUE, Ted & SCOTCHMER, Suzanne & THISSE, Jacques-FranÃ§ois, . "Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1314, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Flavio Menezes & Rohan Pitchford, 2004. "A model of seller holdout," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 231-253, August.
- V.V. Chari & Larry E. Jones, 2000.
"A reconsideration of the problem of social cost: Free riders and monopolists,"
Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22.
- V. V. Chari & Larry E. Jones, 1991. "A reconsideration of the problem of social cost: free riders and monopolists," Staff Report 142, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Hugo Sonnenschein, 1968. "The Dual of Duopoly Is Complementary Monopoly: or, Two of Cournot's Theories Are One," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76, pages 316.
- Llobet, G. & Hopenhayn, H. & Mitchell, M., 2000.
"Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents and Buyouts,"
0012, Centro de Estudios Monetarios Y Financieros-.
- Hugo Hopenhayn & Gerard Llobet & Matthew Mitchell, 2006. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents, and Buyouts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(6), pages 1041-1068, December.
- Gerard Llobet & Hugo Hopenhayn & Matthew F. Mitchell, 2000. "Rewarding sequential innovators: prizes, patents and buyouts," Staff Report 273, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Gerard Llobet & Hugo Hopenhayn & Matthew Mitchell, 2003. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents and Buyouts," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000682, David K. Levine.
- Steffen Brenner, 2009. "Optimal formation rules for patent pools," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 373-388, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:523. 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: (Bruno Guallar)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.