When do more patents reduce R&D?
This paper develops a simple duopoly model in which investments in R&D and patents are inputs in the production of firm rents. Patents are necessary to appropriate the returns to the firm’s own R&D, but patents also create potential claims against the rents of rival firms. Analysis of the model reveals a general necessary condition for the existence of a positive correlation between the firm’s R&D intensity and the number of patents it obtains. When that condition is violated, changes in exogenous parameters that induce an increase in firms’ patenting can also induce a decline in R&D intensity. Such a negative relationship is more likely when (1) there is sufficient overlap in firms’ technologies so that each firm’s inventions are likely to infringe the patents of another firm, (2) firms are sufficiently R&D intensive, and (3) patents are cheap relative to both the cost of R&D and the value of final output.
|Date of creation:||2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 10 Independence Mall, Philadelphia, PA 19106-1574|
Web page: http://www.philadelphiafed.org/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.phil.frb.org/econ/wps/index.html Email: |
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.:
- James Bessen & Robert M Hunt, 2004.
"An Empirical Look at Software Patents,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
122247000000000167, David K. Levine.
- Bronwyn Hall, 2004.
"Exploring the patent explosion,"
ESRC Centre for Business Research - Working Papers
wp291, ESRC Centre for Business Research.
- Paul Klemperer, 1990.
"How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
- Klemperer, Paul, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," CEPR Discussion Papers 392, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- F. M. Scherer, 2005. "Patents," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3903.
- Carl Shapiro, 2003.
"Antitrust Limits to Patent Settlements,"
Law and Economics
- Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2007. "Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 7," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff07-1.
- Carl Shapiro, 2004.
"Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools and Standard Setting,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
122247000000000539, David K. Levine.
- Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Carl Shapiro, 2003. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-Setting," Law and Economics 0303005, EconWPA.
- Shapiro, Carl, 2000. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-Setting," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt4hs5s9wk, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Gilbert, R. & Shapiro, C., 1988.
"Optimal Patent Length And Breadth,"
28, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
- Robert M. Hunt, 2006.
"When Do More Patents Reduce R&D?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 87-91, May.
- Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 2007.
"How Strong Are Weak Patents?,"
Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series
qt8vg425vj, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Tom Lee & Louis L. Wilde, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 429-436.
- Jay Pil Choi, 2003. "Pools and Cross-Licensing in the Shadow of Patent Litigation," CESifo Working Paper Series 1070, CESifo Group Munich.
- James Bessen, 2004. "Patent Thickets: Strategic Patenting of Complex Technologies," Working Papers 0401, Research on Innovation.
- Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000.
"Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not),"
NBER Working Papers
7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- 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.
- Robert M. Hunt, 2002.
"Patentability, industry structure, and innovation,"
01-13, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
- Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1985. "Innovation and Industry Evolution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 100(1), pages 81-99.
- Rosemarie Ham Ziedonis, 2004. "Don't Fence Me In: Fragmented Markets for Technology and the Patent Acquisition Strategies of Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 804-820, June.
- Robert M. Hunt, 1999. "Nonobviousness and the incentive to innovate: an economic analysis of intellectual property reform," Working Papers 99-3, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedpwp:06-6. 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: (Beth Paul)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.