IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v22y2015i4p321-344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Market Value of Technology Disclosures to Standard Setting Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Katrin Hussinger
  • Franz Schwiebacher

Abstract

In light of the increased demand for interoperability, fragmented ownership of intellectual property and high costs for communicating new technologies, open standard-setting activities emerged as an important coordination and diffusion mechanism. Little is known about the value of contributions to standard setting organizations (SSOs) for technology providers. This paper provides a large-scale empirical assessment of the value of disclosures to SSOs for technology sponsors. Our findings show that disclosures referring explicitly to patents are evaluated positively by the market while this is not the case for blanket disclosures. This indicates that the expected benefits of participating in SSOs outweigh potential disadvantages from making patented technologies available to the market under SSO licensing conditions. The market does not appreciate disclosures to SSOs if there is uncertainty about the associated technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Katrin Hussinger & Franz Schwiebacher, 2015. "The Market Value of Technology Disclosures to Standard Setting Organizations," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 321-344, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:22:y:2015:i:4:p:321-344
    DOI: 10.1080/13662716.2015.1049866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13662716.2015.1049866
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662716.2015.1049866?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2006. "The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms," KITeS Working Papers 186, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2006.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    3. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Derek Bosworth & Elizabeth Webster (ed.), 2006. "The Management of Intellectual Property," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 3649, March.
    5. Gilbert, Richard, 2009. "The Essentiality Test for Patent Pools," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt1wf59608, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    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. Horim Kim & Jaeyoung Kim & Kyungmyung Jang & Jaemin Han, 2020. "Are the Blockchain-Based Patents Sustainable for Increasing Firm Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Alexeeva-Alexeev, Inna & Mazas-Perez-Oleaga, Cristina, 2024. "Do ICT firms manage R&D differently? Firm-level and macroeconomic effects on corporate R&D investment: Empirical evidence from a multi-countries context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Gamarra, Yanis Luca & Friedl, Gunther, 2023. "Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    4. Davide Cannito & Cesare Righi & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing Patent Applications at the USPTO," Working Papers 1382, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Blind, Knut & Krieger, Bastian & Pellens, Maikel, 2022. "The interplay between product innovation, publishing, patenting and developing standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. Righi, Cesare & Cannito, Davide & Vladasel, Theodor, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(4).
    7. Lorenz Brachtendorf & Fabian Gaessler & Dietmar Harhoff, 2023. "Truly standard‐essential patents? A semantics‐based analysis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 132-157, January.
    8. Zhao, Qifeng & Luo, Qianfeng & Tao, Yunqing, 2023. "From chaos to compliance: Standards-setting and financial fraud," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(PA).
    9. Brachtendorf, Lorenz & Gaessler, Fabian & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2020. "Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 265, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    10. Yao, Li & Li, Jun & Chen, Kaihua & Yu, Rongjian, 2024. "Winning the second race of technology standardization: Strategic maneuvers in SEP follow-on innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    11. Michael Murphree & Dan Breznitz, 2018. "Indigenous digital technology standards for development: The case of China," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(3), pages 234-252, December.
    12. von Laer, Maximilian & Blind, Knut & Ramel, Florian, 2022. "Standard essential patents and global ICT value chains with a focus on the catching-up of China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2).
    13. Max Zhang & Xiaonan Yang, 2022. "The Regulatory Perspectives to China’s Emerging Hydrogen Economy: Characteristics, Challenges, and Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Justus Baron & Tim Pohlmann, 2018. "Mapping standards to patents using declarations of standard‐essential patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 504-534, September.
    15. Cesare Righi & Davide Cannito & Theodor Vladasel, 2023. "Continuing patent applications at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1855, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Buggenhagen, Magnus & Blind, Knut, 2022. "Development of 5G – Identifying organizations active in publishing, patenting, and standardization," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4).
    17. Knut Blind & Mirko Bohm, 2019. "The Relationship Between Open Source Software and Standard Setting," JRC Research Reports JRC117836, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Kim, Dong-hyu, 2022. "Effects of catch-up and incumbent firms’ SEP strategic manoeuvres," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).

    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. Hussinger, Katrin & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "The value of disclosing IPR to open standard setting organizations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-060, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. René Belderbos & Leo Sleuwaegen & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2010. "Market Integration and Technological Leadership in Europe," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 403, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    3. Hanna Hottenrott & Bronwyn H. Hall & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2016. "Patents as quality signals? The implications for financing constraints on R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 197-217, April.
    4. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    5. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    6. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    7. Rentocchini, Francesco, 2011. "Sources and characteristics of software patents in the European Union: Some empirical considerations," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 141-157, March.
    8. Blazsek, Szabolcs, 2012. "Patents, secret innovations and firm's rate of return : differential effects of the innovation leader," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1202, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    9. Belderbos, René & Cassiman, Bruno & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 841-852.
    10. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500129 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Bernadette Power & Gavin C Reid, 2021. "The Impact of Intellectual Property Types on the Performance of Business Start-ups in the USA," Working Papers wp523, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    12. Mahdiyeh Entezarkheir, 2017. "Patent thickets, defensive patenting, and induced R&D: an empirical analysis of the costs and potential benefits of fragmentation in patent ownership," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 599-634, March.
    13. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Looking into the black box of Schumpeterian growth theories: An empirical assessment of R&D races," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1530-1545.
    14. Chang, Hsiu-yun & Liang, Woan-lih & Wang, Yanzhi, 2019. "Do institutional investors still encourage patent-based innovation after the tech bubble period?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 149-164.
    15. Belderbos, Rene & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2009. "Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: Exploitation and exploration within and between firms," MERIT Working Papers 2009-067, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    16. Trommetter, M., 2008. "Intellectual property rights in agricultural and agro-food biotechnologies to 2030 (© OECD International Futures Programme)," Working Papers 200805, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    17. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schneller, Olivier, 2010. "Optimal Mix of Applied and Basic Research, Distance to Frontier, and Openness," CEPR Discussion Papers 7795, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Marina Rybalka, 2015. "The innovative input mix. Assessing the importance of R&D and ICT investments for firm performance in manufacturing and services," Discussion Papers 801, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Choi, Jay Pil & Gerlach, Heiko, 2019. "Optimal cross-licensing arrangements: Collusion versus entry deterrence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    20. Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
    21. Raza, Werner G., 2021. "COVID-19 and the failure of pharmaceutical innovation for the global South: The example of "neglected diseases" and emerging infectious diseases," Briefing Papers 32a, Austrian Foundation for Development Research (ÖFSE).

    More about this item

    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:taf:indinn:v:22:y:2015:i:4:p:321-344. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIAI20 .

    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.