IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v11y2015i2p271-316..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Patents Provide The Foundation Of The Market For Inventions

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel F. Spulber

Abstract

The article develops a comprehensive framework demonstrating how patents provide the foundation of the market for inventions. Patents support the establishment of the market in several key ways. First, patents provide a system of intellectual property (IP) rights that increases transaction efficiencies and stimulates competition by offering exclusion, transferability, disclosure, certification, standardization, and divisibility. Second, patent transfers constitute what the article terms “the market for innovative control” that provides incentives for efficient investment in invention, innovation, and complementary assets. Third, patents as intangible real assets promote the financing of invention and innovation. The market foundation role of patents refutes the economically incorrect “rewards” view of patents. The discussion considers how economic benefits of the market for inventions should guide IP policy and antitrust policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel F. Spulber, 2015. "How Patents Provide The Foundation Of The Market For Inventions," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 271-316.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:11:y:2015:i:2:p:271-316.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhv006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Henkel, Joachim, 2022. "Licensing standard-essential patents in the IoT – A value chain perspective on the markets for technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    2. Annita Nugent & Ho Fai Chan & Uwe Dulleck, 2022. "Government funding of university-industry collaboration: exploring the impact of targeted funding on university patent activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 29-73, January.
    3. David Andersson & Thor Berger & Erik Prawitz, 2023. "Making a Market: Infrastructure, Integration, and the Rise of Innovation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 258-274, March.
    4. Poblete, Joaquín & Spulber, Daniel, 2017. "Managing innovation: Optimal incentive contracts for delegated R&D with double moral hazard," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-61.
    5. Jesse Frumkin & Nicholas A. Pairolero & Asrat Tesfayesus & Andrew A. Toole, 2024. "Patent eligibility after Alice: Evidence from USPTO patent examination," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 748-769, August.
    6. deGrazia, Charles A.W. & Pairolero, Nicholas A. & Teodorescu, Mike H.M., 2021. "Examination incentives, learning, and patent office outcomes: The use of examiner’s amendments at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    7. Ding, Yuanyi, 2023. "Does natural resources cause sustainable financial development or resources curse? Evidence from group of seven economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    8. Pere Arqué‐Castells & Daniel F. Spulber, 2023. "Firm Matching in the Market for Technology: Business Stealing and Business Creation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 961-1003, December.
    9. Baron, Justus & Pohlmann, Tim & Blind, Knut, 2016. "Essential patents and standard dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1762-1773.
    10. María García‐Vega & Elena Huergo, 2021. "Organization of R&D outsourcing: Asymmetric cross‐effects between locations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 503-524, August.
    11. Spulber, Daniel F., 2016. "Patent licensing and bargaining with innovative complements and substitutes," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 693-713.
    12. Shiyun Xia, 2024. "Technology market, product market and aggregate innovation," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(3), pages 901-932, August.
    13. Daria Berdyugina & Denis Cavallucci, 2023. "Automatic extraction of inventive information out of patent texts in support of manufacturing design studies using Natural Languages Processing," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 2495-2509, June.
    14. van der Waal, Mark B. & Feddema, Jelle J. & van de Burgwal, Linda H.M., 2023. "Mapping the broad societal impact of patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    15. Alexander V. Giczy & Nicholas A. Pairolero & Andrew A. Toole, 2022. "Identifying artificial intelligence (AI) invention: a novel AI patent dataset," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 476-505, April.
    16. de Grazia, Charles A.W. & Giczy, Alexander V. & Pairolero, Nicholas A., 2024. "Procrastination or incomplete data? An analysis of USPTO examiner search activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(7).
    17. Felix Carl Schultz & Vincent Czyrnik & Ingo Pies, 2024. "Is there a case for or against patents to incentivize green technologies?: A critical evaluation of innovation incentives for the global north and global south," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 1-9, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General

    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:oup:jcomle:v:11:y:2015:i:2:p:271-316.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    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.