IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea05/19180.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To Patent Or Not To Patent: The Role Of Optimal Patent Breadth And The Decision To Defend The Patent Right

Author

Listed:
  • Yiannaka, Amalia
  • Fulton, Murray E.

Abstract

The paper examines the relationship between the innovator's patenting and patent breadth decisions as well as how these two decisions affect, and are affected by, the innovator's ability to enforce her patent rights. An important feature of the model is that the entrant may be able, by his choice of location in product space, to affect the innovator's decision to defend her patent. An interesting finding of the paper is that the innovator might find it optimal to patent her innovation even when she chooses to not defend her patent by invoking a trial when patent infringement occurs. The paper also shows that, in most cases, the greater is the entrant's R&D effectiveness, the smaller is the innovator's incentive to patent her product. If patenting occurs, however, the greater is R&D effectiveness, the greater is the patent breadth that could be chosen without triggering infringement.

Suggested Citation

  • Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray E., 2005. "To Patent Or Not To Patent: The Role Of Optimal Patent Breadth And The Decision To Defend The Patent Right," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19180, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea05:19180
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.19180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/19180/files/sp05yi01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.19180?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. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-151, Spring.
    2. 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.
    3. Waterson, Michael, 1990. "The Economics of Product Patents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 860-869, September.
    4. Horstmann, Ignatius & MacDonald, Glenn M & Slivinski, Alan, 1985. "Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms: To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 837-858, October.
    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. Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray, 2006. "Strategic patent breadth and entry deterrence with drastic product innovations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 177-202, January.
    2. Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray E., 2004. "Getting Away With Robbery? Patenting Behavior With The Threat Of Infringement," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20304, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Amalia Yiannaka, 2009. "When Less Is More: Optimal Patent Breadth under the Threat of Patent Validity Challenges," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(4), pages 1067-1093, April.
    4. Julio R. Robledo, 2005. "The Effect of Litigation on Intellectual Property and Welfare," Vienna Economics Papers 0511, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    5. Jürgen Mihm & Fabian J. Sting & Tan Wang, 2015. "On the Effectiveness of Patenting Strategies in Innovation Races," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2662-2684, November.
    6. Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray E., 2006. "Getting Away With Robbery? Patenting Behavior With The Threat Of Infringement," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139933, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    8. Julio R. Robledo, 2005. "The Effect of Litigation on Intellectual Property and Welfare," Vienna Economics Papers vie0511, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    9. Yiannaka, Amalia & Fulton, Murray E., 2001. "Strategic Patent Breadth For Drastic Product Innovations," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20500, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Amalia Yiannaka & Murray Fulton, 2003. "Strategic Patent Breadth And Entry Deterrence With Drastic Product Innovations," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000362, UCLA Department of Economics.
    11. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    12. Dierker, Daniel A. & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2002. "The Butcher The Baker The Pharmaceutical Maker: Why The Agricultural Biotech Industry May Differ From The General Biotech Industry," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19728, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Marco, Alan C., 2005. "Learning by Suing: Structural Estimates of Court Errors in Patent Litigation," Vassar College Department of Economics Working Paper Series 68, Vassar College Department of Economics.
    14. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Dietmar Harhoff & Georg von Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner, 2016. "Conflict Resolution, Public Goods, and Patent Thickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 704-721, March.
    16. 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).
    17. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2009. "Using neural network to analyze the influence of the patent performance upon the market value of the US pharmaceutical companies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 637-655, September.
    18. Juranek, Steffen, 2018. "Investing in legal advice," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 28-46.
    19. Malva, Antonio Della & Hussinger, Katrin, 2012. "Corporate science in the patent system: An analysis of the semiconductor technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 118-135.
    20. Biggi, Gianluca & Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Benfenati, Emilio, 2022. "Patent Toxicity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
      • Gianluca Biggi & Elisa Giuliani & Arianna Martinelli, 2020. "Patent Toxicity," LEM Papers Series 2020/33, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

    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:ags:aaea05:19180. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.