IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/11168.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What is the Impact of Software Patent Shifts?: Evidence from Lotus v. Borland

Author

Listed:
  • Josh Lerner
  • Feng Zhu

Abstract

Economists have debated the extent to which strengthening patent protection spurs or detracts from technological innovation. In this paper, we examine the reduction of software copyright protection in the Lotus v. Borland decision. If patent and copyright protections are substitutes, then weakening of one form of protection should be associated with an increasing reliance on the other. We find that the firms affected by the diminution of copyright protection disproportionately accelerated their patenting in subsequent years. But little evidence can be found for harmful effects: in fact, the increased reliance on patents is correlated with some positive outcomes for firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Josh Lerner & Feng Zhu, 2005. "What is the Impact of Software Patent Shifts?: Evidence from Lotus v. Borland," NBER Working Papers 11168, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:11168
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w11168.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2007. "An Empirical Look at Software Patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 157-189, March.
    2. Robert W. Hahn, 2005. "Intellectual Property Rights in Frontier Industries: Software and Biotechnology," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51596, September.
    3. Lanjouw, Jean O., 1997. "The Introduction of Pharmaceutical Product Patents in India: "Heartless Exploitation of the Poor and Suffering"?," Center Discussion Papers 28385, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    4. 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.
    5. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2001. "Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff01-1.
    6. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
    7. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1998. "Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 247-304, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    10. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    11. Sakakibara, Mariko & Branstetter, Lee, 2001. "Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 77-100, Spring.
    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. 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. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    3. Vladlena LISENCO, 2021. "Improving the practice of Competitive Strategies for the protection of Intellectual Property: the law and economics approach," Eastern European Journal for Regional Studies (EEJRS), Center for Studies in European Integration (CSEI), Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova (ASEM), vol. 7(1), pages 173-199, June.
    4. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D.J. Wu, 2009. "Participation in a Platform Ecosystem: Appropriability, Competition, and Access to the Installed Base," Working Papers 09-14, NET Institute, revised Sep 2009.
    5. David Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson & Gary Pisano & Pian Shu, 2020. "Foreign Competition and Domestic Innovation: Evidence from US Patents," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 357-374, September.
    6. Wagner, S. & Cockburn, I., 2010. "Patents and the survival of Internet-related IPOs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 214-228, March.
    7. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier & Long Zhao, 2022. "Determinants of locational patenting behavior of Canadian firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 268-291, May.
    8. Sunny Sun & Xiaoming Yang & Weiwen Li, 2014. "Variance-enhancing corporate entrepreneurship under deregulation: An option portfolio approach," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 733-761, September.
    9. 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).
    10. Wen Wen & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman, 2012. "Patent Pools, Thickets, and Open Source Software Entry by Start-Up Firms," NBER Chapters, in: Standards, Patents and Innovations, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Jeppesen, Lars Bo & Miric, Milan, 2022. "Profiting from digital innovation: Patents, copyright and performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    12. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 102-121, July.
    13. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    14. Andrea Orame & Daniele Pianeselli, 2023. "Thinking the green transition: evidence from the automotive industry," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 767, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    15. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2008. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 982-997, May.
    16. Sun, Sunny Li & Chen, Victor Z. & Sunny, Sanwar A. & Chen, Jie, 2019. "Venture capital as an innovation ecosystem engineer in an emerging market," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 1-1.
    17. Feng Zhu, 2008. "Ad-sponsored Business Models and Compatibility Incentives of Social Networks," Working Papers 08-20, NET Institute, revised Sep 2008.
    18. 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).
    19. 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.
    20. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.

    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. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Dr Chiara Rosazza Bondibene, 2012. "A Study of Patent Thickets," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 401, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    3. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    4. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    5. Yun Hou & I.P.L. Png & Xi Xiong, 2023. "When stronger patent law reduces patenting: Empirical evidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 977-1012, April.
    6. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie & Elisabeth Müller, 2010. "Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 899-925, June.
    7. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2009. "Patents, Thickets and the Financing of Early‐Stage Firms: Evidence from the Software Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 729-773, September.
    8. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2006. "Patents vs. Trade Secrets: Knowledge Licensing and Spillover," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(6), pages 1112-1147, December.
    9. Wen Wen & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman, 2013. "Patent Commons, Thickets, and Open Source Software Entry by Start-Up Firms," NBER Working Papers 19394, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bhattacharya, Sudipto & Guriev, Sergei, 2004. "Knowledge Disclosure, Patents and Optimal Organization of Research and Development," CEPR Discussion Papers 4513, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    12. Kwon, Seokbeom & Marco, Alan C., 2021. "Can antitrust law enforcement spur innovation? Antitrust regulation of patent consolidation and its impact on follow-on innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    13. Stefano Comino & Fabio M. Manenti & NIkolaus Thumm, 2017. "The Role of Patents in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). A survey of the Literature," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0212, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    14. Wen Wen & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman, 2016. "Opening Up Intellectual Property Strategy: Implications for Open Source Software Entry by Start-up Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(9), pages 2668-2691, September.
    15. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    16. Ralph Siebert, 2013. "Are Ex Ante and Ex Post Licensing Agreements Useful Instruments to Lessen Uncertainty in R&D?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4535, CESifo.
    17. Dr Chiara Rosazza Bondibene, 2012. "A Study of Patent Thickets," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 401, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    18. Kimberlee Weatherall & Elizabeth Webster, 2014. "Patent Enforcement: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 312-343, April.
    19. Stefano Comino & Fabio Maria Manenti, 2015. "Intellectual Property and Innovation in Information and Communication Technology (ICT)," JRC Research Reports JRC97541, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:nbr:nberwo:11168. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.