IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/09039.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inventions under siege? The impact of technology competition on licensing

Author

Listed:
  • Grimpe, Christoph
  • Hussinger, Katrin

Abstract

In recent years, firms have increasingly contributed to and been confronted with a patent landscape characterized by numerous but marginal inventions, overlapping claims and patent fences. Literature suggests that both the fragmentation of ownership and the threat of a firm's patent applications being blocked by competitors' patents lead to increased patenting and inlicensing activity. In this paper, we investigate the effect of expected blocking on firms' engagement in in- and out-licensing. Based on a sample of more than 400 German manufacturing firms our results show that firms engage in in- and out-licensing if technology competition increases which is in line with the argument that licensing can mitigate hold-up problems in technology markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2009. "Inventions under siege? The impact of technology competition on licensing," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-039, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:09039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/27763/1/607848138.PDF
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2006. "R&D and Firm Performance in a Transition Economy," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 481-496, November.
    2. Georg Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner & Dietmar Harhoff, 2013. "Incidence and Growth of Patent Thickets: The Impact of Technological Opportunities and Complexity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 521-563, September.
    3. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    4. 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.
    5. Nancy T. Gallini & Ralph A. Winter, 1985. "Licensing in the Theory of Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 237-252, Summer.
    6. Gallini, Nancy T, 1984. "Deterrence by Market Sharing: A Strategic Incentive for Licensing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 931-941, December.
    7. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1997. "Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership," NBER Working Papers 6297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Rivers, Douglas & Vuong, Quang H., 1988. "Limited information estimators and exogeneity tests for simultaneous probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-366, November.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall, 1990. "The Manufacturing Sector Master File: 1959-1987," NBER Working Papers 3366, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
    11. Dirk Czarnitzki, 2005. "The Extent and Evolution of Productivity Deficiency in Eastern Germany," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 211-231, October.
    12. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    13. Paul A. David, 2001. "Will Building ‘Good Fences’ Really Make ‘Good Neighbors’ in Science?," Working Papers 01005, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    14. Cragg, John G. & Donald, Stephen G., 1993. "Testing Identifiability and Specification in Instrumental Variable Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 222-240, April.
    15. Schneider, Cédric, 2008. "Fences and competition in patent races," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1348-1364, November.
    16. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
    17. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    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. Nishimura, Junichi & Okada, Yosuke, 2014. "R&D portfolios and pharmaceutical licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1250-1263.
    2. Florian Köhler, 2011. "Patent cross-licensing, the influence of IP interdependency and the moderating effect of firm size," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 448-467, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Licensing; blocking patents; discrete and complex technologies; technology competition;

    JEL classification:

    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:zbw:zewdip:09039. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.