IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v172y2021ics0040162521005011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-practicing entities and transparency of patent ownership in Europe: the case of UK dormant companies

Author

Listed:
  • Sterzi, Valerio
  • Rameshkoumar, Jean-Paul
  • Van Der Pol, Johannes

Abstract

While various studies in the fields of law and economics have analysed the business models of patent aggregators and large non-practicing entities (NPEs) in the US, small NPEs operating in Europe typically escape academic and media attention. Here, to address this imbalance, we specifically identify and characterize the patent portfolios of NPEs registered as dormant companies in the UK and investigate whether they are created for the purpose of acquiring valuable IP assets or launching litigation campaigns. Our econometric analysis – based on more than two hundred NPEs registered as dormant companies in 2019 – supports the second hypothesis. Finally, as an illustrative example of how small NPEs use UK dormant companies to acquire and litigate patents in Europe, we describe the business model of Dragon Green Development Balboa SA, an entity incorporated in the Republic of Panama that controls thirteen UK dormant companies and which is involved in fourteen patent litigation cases in Germany.

Suggested Citation

  • Sterzi, Valerio & Rameshkoumar, Jean-Paul & Van Der Pol, Johannes, 2021. "Non-practicing entities and transparency of patent ownership in Europe: the case of UK dormant companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:172:y:2021:i:c:s0040162521005011
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162521005011
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121069?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    2. Josh Feng & Xavier Jaravel, 2020. "Crafting Intellectual Property Rights: Implications for Patent Assertion Entities, Litigation, and Innovation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 140-181, January.
    3. Katrin Cremers & Max Ernicke & Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Christian Helmers & Luke McDonagh & Paula Schliessler & Nicolas Zeebroeck, 2017. "Erratum to: Patent litigation in Europe," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 45-46, August.
    4. Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "Patent Assertion Entities and Patent Ownership Transparency: Strategic Recording of Patent Transactions at the Uspto [In Defense of Forum Shopping: A Realistic Look at Selecting a Venue]," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 978-1006.
    5. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    6. Stuart J. H. Graham & Alan C. Marco & Amanda F. Myers, 2018. "Patent transactions in the marketplace: Lessons from the USPTO Patent Assignment Dataset," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 343-371, September.
    7. Albert, M. B. & Avery, D. & Narin, F. & McAllister, P., 1991. "Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 251-259, June.
    8. H. Kevin Steensma & Mukund Chari & Ralph Heidl, 2016. "A Comparative Analysis of Patent Assertion Entities in Markets for Intellectual Property Rights," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 2-17, February.
    9. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    10. Valerio STERZI & Jean-Paul RAMESHKOUMAR & Johannes VAN DER POL, 2020. "Non-practicing entities and transparency in patent ownership in Europe," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2020-10, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    11. Kwon, Seokbeom & Drev, Matej, 2020. "Defensive Patent Aggregators as Shields against Patent Assertion Entities? Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    12. Andrei Hagiu & David B. Yoffie, 2013. "The New Patent Intermediaries: Platforms, Defensive Aggregators, and Super-Aggregators," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 45-66, Winter.
    13. Leiponen, Aija & Delcamp, Henry, 2019. "The anatomy of a troll? Patent licensing business models in the light of patent reassignment data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 298-311.
    14. Caviggioli, Federico & Ughetto, Elisa, 2016. "Buyers in the patent auction market: Opening the black box of patent acquisitions by non-practicing entities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 122-132.
    15. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    16. Akcigit, Ufuk & Abrams, David & Oz, Gokhan & Pearce, Jeremy, 2019. "The Patent Troll: Benign Middleman or Stick-Up Artist?," CEPR Discussion Papers 13620, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Katrin Cremers & Max Ernicke & Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Christian Helmers & Luke McDonagh & Paula Schliessler & Nicolas Zeebroeck, 2017. "Patent litigation in Europe," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 1-44, August.
      • Cremers, Katrin & Ernicke, Max & Gaessler, Fabian & Harhoff, Dietmar & Helmers, Christian & McDonagh, Luke & Schliessler, Paula & Van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2013. "Patent litigation in Europe," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-072, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
      • Katrin Cremers & Max Ernicke & Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff & Christian Helmers & Luke Mc Donagh & Paula Schliessler & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2017. "Patent litigation in Europe," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/226239, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Laurie Ciaramella & Catalina Martínez & Yann Ménière, 2017. "Tracking patent transfers in different European countries: methods and a first application to medical technologies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 817-850, August.
    19. Haber, Stephen H. & Werfel, Seth H., 2016. "Patent trolls as financial intermediaries? Experimental evidence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 64-66.
    20. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    21. Lauren Cohen & Umit G. Gurun & Scott Duke Kominers, 2019. "Patent Trolls: Evidence from Targeted Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(12), pages 5461-5486, December.
    22. Gianluca Orsatti & Valerio Sterzi, 2018. "Do Patent Assertion Entities Harm Innovation? Evidence from Patent Transfers in Europe," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2018-08, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    23. Pénin, Julien, 2012. "Strategic uses of patents in markets for technology: A story of fabless firms, brokers and trolls," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 633-641.
    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. Grazia Sveva Ascione & Laura Ciucci & Claudio Detotto & Valerio Sterzi, 2022. "Universities involvement in patent litigation: an analysis of the characteristics of US litigated patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6855-6879, December.
    2. Ascione, Grazia Sveva & Ciucci, Laura & Detotto, Claudio & Sterzi, Valerio, 2024. "University patent litigation in the United States: Do we have a problem?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    3. Valerio Sterzi & Cecilia Maronero & Gianluca Orsatti & Andrea Vezzulli, 2024. "Non-practicing entities in Europe: an empirical analysis of patent acquisitions at the European Patent Office," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 33(5), pages 1271-1297.

    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. Valerio STERZI & Jean-Paul RAMESHKOUMAR & Johannes VAN DER POL, 2020. "Non-practicing entities and transparency in patent ownership in Europe," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2020-10, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    2. Sterzi, Valerio & Maronero, Cecilia & Orsatti, Gianluca & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2023. "Non-Practicing Entities and their patent acquisition activity in Europe," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202322, University of Turin.
    3. Valerio Sterzi & Cecilia Maronero & Gianluca Orsatti & Andrea Vezzulli, 2024. "Non-practicing entities in Europe: an empirical analysis of patent acquisitions at the European Patent Office," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 33(5), pages 1271-1297.
    4. Kwon, Seokbeom & Drev, Matej, 2020. "Defensive Patent Aggregators as Shields against Patent Assertion Entities? Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Adrien HERVOUET & Emmanuel LORENZON & Cesare RIGHI & Valerio STERZI, 2023. "Patent Privateering," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2023-10, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    6. Mukund Chari & H. Kevin Steensma & Charles Connaughton & Ralph Heidl, 2022. "The influence of patent assertion entities on inventor behavior," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1666-1690, August.
    7. Caviggioli, Federico & De Marco, Antonio & Montobbio, Fabio & Ughetto, Elisa, 2020. "The licensing and selling of inventions by US universities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    8. Gianluca Orsatti & Valerio Sterzi, 2018. "Do Patent Assertion Entities Harm Innovation? Evidence from Patent Transfers in Europe," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2018-08, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    9. Eun Han & So Sohn, 2015. "Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 821-839, October.
    10. Ascione, Grazia Sveva & Ciucci, Laura & Detotto, Claudio & Sterzi, Valerio, 2024. "University patent litigation in the United States: Do we have a problem?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    11. Juranek, Steffen, 2018. "Investing in legal advice," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 28-46.
    12. Cédric Gossart & Altay Özaygen & Müge Özman, 2020. "Are Litigated Patents More Valuable? The Case of LEDs," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 825-844, September.
    13. Ayerbe, Cécile & Azzam, Jamal & Boussetta, Selma & Pénin, Julien, 2023. "Revisiting the consequences of loans secured by patents on technological firms' intellectual property and innovation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    14. Fischer, Timo & Leidinger, Jan, 2014. "Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 519-529.
    15. Caviggioli, Federico & Ughetto, Elisa, 2016. "Buyers in the patent auction market: Opening the black box of patent acquisitions by non-practicing entities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 122-132.
    16. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    17. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    18. Altuntas, Serkan & Dereli, Turkay & Kusiak, Andrew, 2015. "Analysis of patent documents with weighted association rules," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 249-262.
    19. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    20. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dormant companies; Patent litigation; Non-practicing entities; Patent assertion entities; Patent trolls; Patent transparency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    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:eee:tefoso:v:172:y:2021:i:c:s0040162521005011. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.