IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/09038.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Software Patent and its Impact on Software Innovation in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki

Abstract

In Japan, the software patent system has been reformed and now software has become a patentable subject matter. In this paper, this pro-patent shift on software is surveyed and its impact on software innovation is analyzed. Before the 1990's, inventions related to software could not be patented by themselves, but they could be applied when combined with hardware related inventions. Therefore, integrated electronics firms used to be the major software patent applicants. However, during the period from the late 1990's to the early 2000's, when software patent reforms were introduced, innovative activities (measuring patent applications) by independent software development firms began. We used datasets linking the IIP (Institute of Intellectual Property) patent database (individual patent datasets by using JPO's publication data) and firm level data from the Survey on Selected Services (software part) (METI) and the Basic Survey of Business Activity and Structure (METI). Based on the panel datasets from approximately 550 firms from 2001 to 2005, we found that patent applications from software firms gradually increased from the 1990's, while we were unable to find a direct impact of software patent system reforms. In addition, it was also found that patent application is positively related to a software company's independent strategy of subcontracting out system headed by large system integrators.

Suggested Citation

  • MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2009. "Software Patent and its Impact on Software Innovation in Japan," Discussion papers 09038, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:09038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/09e038.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wagner, S. & Cockburn, I., 2010. "Patents and the survival of Internet-related IPOs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 214-228, March.
    2. Hall, Bronwyn H. & MacGarvie, Megan, 2010. "The private value of software patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    3. Josh Lerner, 2002. "Patent Protection and Innovation Over 150 Years," NBER Working Papers 8977, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Goto, Akira & Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2007. "Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1431-1442, November.
    5. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    6. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
    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. YAMAUCHI Isamu, 2018. "Causal Effects of Software Patents on Firm Growth: Evidence from a policy reform in Japan," Discussion papers 18063, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    2. Ankita Tyagi & Omni Yadav & Ajai Kumar Garg, 2013. "A Survey On Software Patents And Their Linkage To Promoting Innovation: India Perspective," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(04), pages 1-17.
    3. ONISHI Koichiro & YAMAUCHI Isamu, 2018. "Intellectual Property Rights for Software and Accessibility to Venture Capitalists," Discussion papers 18036, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    2. Hella Bani Baghdadi & Sami Aouadi, 2018. "Does Patent Performance Promote Relative Technological Performance in Countries Bordering the Mediterranean?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(4), pages 1246-1269, December.
    3. Antonio Cubel & Vicente Esteve & Maria Teresa Sanchis & Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis, 2014. "The effect of foreign and domestic patents on total factor productivity during the second half of the 20th century," Working Papers 06/14, Instituto Universitario de Análisis Económico y Social.
    4. Hasan, Iftekhar & Tucci, Christopher L., 2010. "The innovation-economic growth nexus: Global evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1264-1276, December.
    5. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2009. "Business And Financial Method Patents, Innovation, And Policy," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(s1), pages 443-473, September.
    6. Nancy Gallini, 2017. "Do patents work? Thickets, trolls and antibiotic resistance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 893-926, November.
    7. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "The Least developed countries' TRIPS Waiver and the Strength of Intellectual Property Protection," EconStor Preprints 271537, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    9. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    10. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    11. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2009_041.
    12. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Claude DIEBOLT & Karine PELLIER, 2018. "Patents in the Long Run: Theory, History and Statistics," Working Papers of BETA 2018-20, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. de Rassenfosse, Gaetan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 779-792, June.
    15. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    16. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    17. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    18. Campi, Mercedes & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2015. "Intellectual property protection in plant varieties: A worldwide index (1961–2011)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 951-964.
    19. Maggie Xiaoyang Chen & Murat Iyigun, 2011. "Patent Protection and Strategic Delays in Technology Development: Implications for Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 211-232, July.
    20. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eti:dpaper:09038. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    Please note that corrections may 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.