IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Role of Fees in Patent Systems: Theory and Evidence

  • Gaétan de Rassenfosse
  • Bruno Van Pottelsberghe

This paper reviews the economic literature on the role of fees in patent systems. Two main research questions are usually addressed: the impact of patent fees on the behavior of applicants and the question of optimal fees. Studies in the former group confirm that a range of fees affect the behavior of applicants and suggest that a patent is an inelastic good. Studies in the latter group provide grounds for both low and high application (or pre-grant) fees and renewal (or post-grant) fees, depending on the structural context and on the policy objectives. The paper also presents new stylized facts on patent fees of thirty patent offices worldwide. It is shown that application fees are generally lower than renewal fees, and renewal fees increase more than proportionally with patent age (to the notable exception of Switzerland and the U.S.).

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/57652/1/2010-023-DERASSENFOSSE_VANPOTTELSBERGHE-theroleoffees.pdf
File Function: 2010-023-DERASSENFOSSE_VANPOTTELSBERGHE-theroleoffees
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series Working Papers ECARES with number ECARES 2010-023.

as
in new window

Length: 27 p.
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published by:
Handle: RePEc:eca:wpaper:2013/57652
Contact details of provider: Postal: Av. F.D., Roosevelt, 39, 1050 Bruxelles
Phone: (32 2) 650 30 75
Fax: (32 2) 650 44 75
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Mark Schankerman & Ariel Pakes, 1985. "Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries During thePost-1950 Period," NBER Working Papers 1650, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Christine MacLeod & Jennifer Tann & James Andrew & Jeremy Stein, 2003. "Evaluating inventive activity: the cost of nineteenth-century UK patents and the fallibility of renewal data," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 56(3), pages 537-562, 08.
  3. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Didier François, 2009. "The cost factor in patent systems," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/13422, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  4. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2008. "On the price elasticity of demand for patents," Working Papers CEB 08-031.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  5. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 1995. "Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in the OECD," NBER Working Papers 5049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Georg LICHT & Konrad ZOZ, 1998. "Patents and R&D, An Econometric Investigation Using Applications for German, European and US Patents by German Companies," Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, ENSAE, issue 49-50, pages 329-360.
  7. Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "Languages, Fees and the International Scope of Patenting," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 10456, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
  8. Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "The quality factor in patent systems," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(6), pages 1755-1793, December.
  9. Carine Peeters & Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2006. "Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 109-135, April.
  10. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2007. "Per un pugno di dollari: a first look at the price elasticity of patents," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6391, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  11. Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin & Reichl, Bettina & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "Patent validation at the country level--The role of fees and translation costs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1423-1437, November.
  12. Paroma Sanyal, 2003. "Understanding patents: The role Of R&D funding sources and the patent office," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 507-529.
  13. Wesley M Cohen & Richard R Nelson & John P Walsh, 2003. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not)," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000624, David K. Levine.
  14. Eugenio Archontopoulos & Dominique Guellec & Niels Stevnsborg & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "When small is beautiful: measuring the evolution and consequences of the voluminosity of patent applications at the EPO," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6191, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  15. Bruno van Pottelsberghe, 2008. "The London Agreement and the cost of patenting in Europe," Working Papers 264, Bruegel.
  16. Gilbert, R. & Shapiro, C., 1988. "Optimal Patent Length And Breadth," Papers 28, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
  17. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & George Lazaridis, 2007. "The rigour of EPO's patentability criteria: an insight into the induced withdrawals," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6189, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  18. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe, 2008. "A Policy Insight into the R&D-Patent Relationship," Working Papers CEB 08-008.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  19. Deng, Yi, 2005. "Private Value of European Patents," Departmental Working Papers 0513, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
  20. Robert M. Hunt, 2006. "When Do More Patents Reduce R&D?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 87-91, May.
  21. Petra Moser, 2007. "Why Don't Inventors Patent?," NBER Working Papers 13294, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Bruno van Pottelsberghe & Jérôme Danguy, 2009. "Cost Benefit Analysis of the Community Patent," Working Papers 366, Bruegel.
  23. Deng, Yi, 2007. "Private value of European patents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1785-1812, October.
  24. Gans Joshua S & King Stephen P & Lampe Ryan, 2004. "Patent Renewal Fees and Self-Funding Patent Offices," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, July.
  25. Marc Baudry & Béatrice Dumont, 2009. "A Bayesian Real Option Approach to Patents and Optimal Renewal Fees," Working Papers hal-00419330, HAL.
  26. Emmanuel DUGUET & Isabelle KABLA, 1998. "Appropriation Strategy and the Motivations to Use the Patent System: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, ENSAE, issue 49-50, pages 289-327.
  27. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
  28. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
  29. Lemley, Mark, 2000. "Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt1tc166q2, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
  30. Adams, Kay & Kim, Douglas & Joutz, Frederick L. & Trost, Robert P. & Mastrogianis, Gus, 1997. "Modeling and forecasting U.S. Patent application filings," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 491-535, October.
  31. Masaaki Kotabe, 1992. "A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Patent Systems," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 147-168, March.
  32. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eca:wpaper:2013/57652. 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: (Benoit Pauwels)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.