Giving away the game? The impact of the disclosure effect on the patenting decision
This article explores the propensity to patent in the light of the disclosure effect. Unlike earlier approaches concerned with the patenting decision, we take into account that a disclosure effect may decrease the merits of patenting by facilitating inventing around the patent for competitors. In our theoretical model, we find that the disclosure effect - contingent on the competitive environment of the inventor - possibly has substantial negative effects on the propensity to patent. An empirical investigation of the theoretical results finds support for the proposed effects.
|Date of creation:||2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: L 7,1; D - 68161 Mannheim|
Web page: http://www.zew.de/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2005.
"Patents vs trade secrets: knowledge licensing and spillover,"
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
444, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- 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.
- Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2004. "Patents vs Trade Secrets: Knowledge Licensing and Spillover," Working Papers w0064, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR), revised Feb 2006.
- Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2006. "Patents VS Trade Secrets: Knowledge Licensing and Spillover," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/3jesolrqda8, Sciences Po.
- Klemperer, Paul, 1990.
"How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
392, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- 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.
- Nisvan Erkal, 2003.
"The Decision to Patent, Cumulative Innovation,and Optimal Policy,"
Department of Economics - Working Papers Series
877, The University of Melbourne.
- Erkal, Nisvan, 2005. "The decision to patent, cumulative innovation, and optimal policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 535-562, September.
- Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
- Waterson, Michael, 1990. "The Economics of Product Patents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 860-69, September.
- Kamien, Morton I. & Zang, Israel, 2000. "Meet me halfway: research joint ventures and absorptive capacity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 995-1012, October.
- Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray, 2006. "Strategic patent breadth and entry deterrence with drastic product innovations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 177-202, January.
- Aoki, Reiko & Spiegel, Yossi, 2009. "Pre-grant patent publication and cumulative innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 333-345, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:12010. 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)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.