IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pes/ieroec/v5y2014i2p49-61.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From The Patent To The Concept Of Free Revealing – Closed And Open Model Of In-Dustrial Property

Author

Listed:
  • Malgorzata Niklewicz-Pijaczynska

    (University of Wroclaw, Poland)

Abstract

This article is based on literature studies, comparative analysis of two different models to stimulate innovative solutions and protect industrial property rights – particularly rights to inventions. For this purpose, the most important assump-tions and the essence of traditional patent system based on institutional protec-tion as well as concepts of free revealing (free access) and open innovation (open invention) were characterized. The paper also presents potential strengths and weaknesses of presented approaches – closed (traditional) and open inventive-ness. The article gives value to the argument that, given real shortcomings, the most effective way to create and commercialize inventions would be one of a complementary nature, taking into account solutions offered by each of the pre-sented approaches, changing current innovation policy. On the one hand, modern companies should not give up institutional protection of their developed technol-ogy solutions and carrying out R&D, on the other, they will be increasingly forced to resort to modern tools of stimulating innovations based on openness, direct market communication and flexible approach to innovation processes of products and services.

Suggested Citation

  • Malgorzata Niklewicz-Pijaczynska, 2014. "From The Patent To The Concept Of Free Revealing – Closed And Open Model Of In-Dustrial Property," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 5(2), pages 49-61, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:pes:ieroec:v:5:y:2014:i:2:p:49-61
    DOI: 10.12775/OeC.2014.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/OeC.2014.013
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.12775/OeC.2014.013?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    2. Stam, Wouter, 2009. "When does community participation enhance the performance of open source software companies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1288-1299, October.
    3. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Ben-Menahem, Shiko M. & Franke, Nikolaus & Füller, Johann & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Treading new ground in household sector innovation research: Scope, emergence, business implications, and diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    4. Massimiliano Gambardella, 2011. "The Scope of Open Licenses in Cultural Contents Production and Distribution," Working Papers hal-04140977, HAL.
    5. 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.
    6. Jean-Michel Dalle & Paul A. David, 2007. "“It Takes All Kinds”: A Simulation Modeling Perspective on Motivation and Coordination in Libre Software Development Projects," Discussion Papers 07-024, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Giorgio Zanarone & Desmond (Ho-Fu) Lo & Tammy L. Madsen, 2016. "The double-edged effect of knowledge acquisition: How contracts safeguard pre-existing resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2104-2120, October.
    8. Konstantin Fursov & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2017. "Make it work!—a study of user innovation in Russia," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 392-402.
    9. Kesidou, Effie & Szirmai, Adam, 2008. "Local Knowledge Spillovers, Innovation and Economic Performance in Developing Countries: A discussion of alternative specifications," MERIT Working Papers 2008-033, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "The Dominant Role Of "Local" Information In User Innovation: The Case Of Mountain Biking," Working papers 4377-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    11. Marcus Wagner & Patrick Llerena, 2008. "Drivers for sustainability-related innovation: A Qualitative analysis of renewable resources, industrial products and travel services," Working Papers of BETA 2008-22, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    12. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2005. "User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-965, August.
    14. Yoshida Shohei & Pan Cong, 2017. "Unilateral Technology Sharing among Competitors in Markets with Heterogeneous Consumers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-6, October.
    15. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric, 2009. "Transfers of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1181-1191, September.
    16. Chiao, Benjamin & MacVaugh, Jason, 2021. "Open innovation and organizational features: An experimental investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 376-389.
    17. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    18. Marcus Wagner, 2007. "The Link between Environmental Innovation, Patents, and Environmental Management," DRUID Working Papers 07-14, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    19. Osterloh, Margit & Rota, Sandra, 2007. "Open source software development--Just another case of collective invention?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 157-171, March.
    20. Madison, Michael J & Frischmann, Brett M. & Strandburg, Katherine J., 2017. "Governing Knowledge Commons -- Introduction & Chapter 1," LawArXiv af3ud, Center for Open Science.
    21. Alfonso GAMBARDELLA & Bronwyn H. HALL, 2004. "Propriety vs. Public Domain Licensing of Software and Research Products," Economics Working Papers ECO2004/15, European University Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    patent; industrial property; free revealing; inventions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation
    • 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:pes:ieroec:v:5:y:2014:i:2:p:49-61. 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: Adam P. Balcerzak (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ibgtopl.html .

    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.