IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/aea/aecrev/v74y1984i1p247-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly: Comment

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Colombo, Stefano & Filippini, Luigi, 2014. "Licensing and innovation: A comment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 353-356.
  2. Gilbert Richard J, 2006. "Competition and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Organization Education, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-23, December.
  3. Kenneth S. Corts, 2000. "Focused Firms and the Incentive to Innovate," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 339-362, June.
  4. Arijit Mukherjee & Sugata Marjit, 2004. "R&D organization and technology transfer," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 243-258, May.
  5. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
  6. David B. Audretsch & Antje Fiedler, 2023. "Power and entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 1573-1592, April.
  7. Arijit Mukherjee & Soma Mukherjee, 2002. "Licensing and the Incentive for Innovation," Industrial Organization 0211008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  8. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
  9. Joshua S. Gans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
  10. Yongmin Chen & Marius Schwartz, 2013. "Product Innovation Incentives: Monopoly vs. Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 513-528, September.
  11. Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Liu, John S., 2016. "A novel approach to identify the major research themes and development trajectory: The case of patenting research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 71-82.
  12. Ufuk Akcigit & Murat Alp Celik & Jeremy Greenwood, 2016. "Buy, Keep, or Sell: Economic Growth and the Market for Ideas," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 943-984, May.
  13. Salman Ali & Syed Mizanur Rahman, 2020. "R&D Expenditure in a Competitive Landscape: A Game Theoretic Approach," International Journal of Business and Economics, School of Management Development, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 19(1), pages 47-60, June.
  14. Manganelli, Anton-Giulio, 2023. "Pay-for-delay settlements and patent expansion practices," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
  15. Levin, Mark (Левин, Марк) & Matrosova, Kseniya (Матросова, Ксения), 2017. "Development and Analysis of Economic Models of Innovation Incentives [Разработка И Исследование Экономических Моделей Стимулирования Инновационных Процессов]," Working Papers 061713, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
  16. Joshua S. Gans & Lars Persson, 2013. "Entrepreneurial commercialization choices and the interaction between IPR and competition policy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 131-151, February.
  17. Chang, Ray-Yun & Hwang, Hong & Peng, Cheng-Hau, 2013. "Technology licensing, R&D and welfare," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 396-399.
  18. Carlo Capuano & Iacopo Grassi, 2020. "Imperfect patent protection, licensing, and willingness to pay for the innovation," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 47(2), pages 333-359, June.
  19. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2004. "An empirical test of the asymmetric models on innovative activity: who invests more into R&D, the incumbent or the challenger?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 153-173, June.
  20. Hyunbae Chun & Sung-Bae Mun, 2014. "Innovative Activities of an Incumbent and a Potential Entrant: An Empirical Exploration of the Role of Uncertainty in Product and Process Innovations," Working Papers 1406, Nam Duck-Woo Economic Research Institute, Sogang University (Former Research Institute for Market Economy).
  21. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2010. "Which Firms Buy Licenses? Market Positions and License Expenditures," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(3), pages 471-488, September.
  22. Joshua S. Gans, 2014. "Negotiating for the Market," NBER Working Papers 20559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2005. "License Expenditures of Incumbents and Potential Entrants: An Empirical Analysis of Firm Behavior," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-35, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  24. Almeida Costa, Luis & Dierickx, Ingemar, 2002. "Licensing and bundling," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 251-267, February.
  25. Carlo Capuano & Iacopo Grassi, 2019. "Imperfect patent protection, licensing, and Social Welfare," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2639-2649.
  26. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Hiller, R. Scott & Savage, Scott J. & Waldman, Donald M., 2018. "Using aggregate market data to estimate patent value: An application to United States smartphones 2010 to 2015," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-31.
  28. Filson, Darren & Gretz, Richard T., 2004. "Strategic innovation and technology adoption in an evolving industry," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 89-121, January.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.