IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01768893.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The conflict between U.S. patent protection and technological innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Wade M. Chumney

    (CSUN - California State University [Northridge])

  • David Wasieleski

    (ICN Business School, Duquesne University [Pittsburgh])

  • E Günter Schumacher

    (ICN Business School, CEREFIGE - Centre Européen de Recherche en Economie Financière et Gestion des Entreprises - UL - Université de Lorraine)

Abstract

Criticisms of patent laws for technological innovations in the United States reveal a multifaceted milieu of problems centered around the protection of short-term economic gain and individual property rights. In this article, we consider this a conflict between current patent laws and the innovation capabilities of organizations. We propose a solution that enables the company to assure its long-term survival in the face of these restrictions. This presumes that the firm will at least maintain its innovation capacities while preserving the company's ethical values and those of its social environment. We offer a theoretical model that is designed to help managers and policymakers reorient their governance strategies for managing the innovation process, using the "ethics of responsibility," which establishes the link to individual moral values at the beginning of a governance process as well as the consequences of a decision. Our integrated causal model of ethical innovation for patents is presented and implications for global organizations and possible solutions for patent law process failure are offered.

Suggested Citation

  • Wade M. Chumney & David Wasieleski & E Günter Schumacher, 2017. "The conflict between U.S. patent protection and technological innovation," Post-Print hal-01768893, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01768893
    DOI: 10.1111/basr.12130
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01768893
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01768893/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/basr.12130?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. 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.
    2. J. Oosterhout & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Extant Social Contracts in Global Business Regulation: Outline of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 729-740, October.
    3. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    4. Etzioni, Amitai, 1988. "Normative-affective factors: Toward a new decision-making model," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 125-150, June.
    5. Brady, F. Neil & Dunn, Craig P., 1995. "Business Meta-Ethics: An Analysis of Two Theories," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 386-398, July.
    6. Sandra Christensen, 2008. "The Role of Law in Models of Ethical Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 451-461, February.
    7. George Brenkert, 2009. "ISCT, Hypernorms, and Business: A Reinterpretation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 645-658, October.
    8. E. Schumacher & David Wasieleski, 2013. "Erratum to: Institutionalizing Ethical Innovation in Organizations: An Integrated Causal Model of Moral Innovation Decision Processes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 181-182, March.
    9. Corvellec, Hervé & Bevan, David, 2005. "The Impossibility of Corporate Ethics – For a Levinasian Approach to Managerial Ethics," GRI-rapport 2005:9, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg Research Institute GRI.
    10. E. Günter Schumacher & David Wasieleski, 2013. "Institutionalizing Ethical Innovation in Organizations: An Integrated Causal Model of Moral Innovation Decision Processes," Post-Print hal-01514547, HAL.
    11. Günter Schumacher & David Wasieleski, 2013. "Institutionalizing Ethical Innovation in Organizations: An Integrated Causal Model of Moral Innovation Decision Processes," Post-Print hal-01380788, HAL.
    12. Phillips, Robert A., 2010. "Ethics and Network Organizations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 533-543, July.
    13. E. Schumacher & David Wasieleski, 2013. "Institutionalizing Ethical Innovation in Organizations: An Integrated Causal Model of Moral Innovation Decision Processes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 15-37, March.
    14. Peter Lewin, 2007. "Creativity or Coercion: Alternative Perspectives on Rights to Intellectual Property," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 441-455, April.
    15. Alma Acevedo, 2012. "Personalist Business Ethics and Humanistic Management: Insights from Jacques Maritain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 197-219, January.
    16. Maitland, Ian, 2002. "Priceless Goods: How Should Life-Saving Drugs be Priced?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 451-480, 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. Muel Kaptein, 2019. "The Moral Entrepreneur: A New Component of Ethical Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 1135-1150, June.
    2. Elina Riivari & Anna-Maija Lämsä, 2019. "Organizational Ethical Virtues of Innovativeness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 223-240, March.
    3. Dmitry A. Ruban, 2022. "Analytical Review of Conjugation of the Ethical Bases of Artificial Intelligence Implementation and Ecologization in Corporate Governance," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 21(2), pages 390-418.
    4. Cristina Mele & Tiziana Russo-Spena & Marco Tregua & Fabio Greco, 2019. "Communication practices in the diffusion of social-business innovation: Insights from B-Corporations," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(4), pages 11-27.
    5. Edwin Rühli & Sybille Sachs & Ruth Schmitt & Thomas Schneider, 2017. "Innovation in Multistakeholder Settings: The Case of a Wicked Issue in Health Care," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 289-305, June.
    6. Keren Naa Abeka Arthur & Richard Owen, 2019. "A Micro-ethnographic Study of Big Data-Based Innovation in the Financial Services Sector: Governance, Ethics and Organisational Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 363-375, December.
    7. Shandana Shoaib & Yehuda Baruch, 2019. "Deviant Behavior in a Moderated-Mediation Framework of Incentives, Organizational Justice Perception, and Reward Expectancy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 617-633, July.
    8. Stefan Schaltegger & Roger Burritt, 2018. "Business Cases and Corporate Engagement with Sustainability: Differentiating Ethical Motivations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 241-259, January.
    9. Rob Lubberink & Vincent Blok & Johan Van Ophem & Onno Omta, 2017. "Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context: A Systematic Literature Review of Responsible, Social and Sustainable Innovation Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-31, May.
    10. Michaela Hausdorf, 2024. "What You Get Is What You See—The Mutual Relationships between Images of Human Nature and Business Model Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, February.
    11. F. Di Iorio & M. Letizia Giorgetti, 2020. "Launch of a product and patents: evidence from the US cardiovascular pharmaceutical sector," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 789-803, August.
    12. Abdullah Abdulaziz-Alhumaidan & Mohammad Jamal Khan, 2024. "The Effect of Ethical Strategy and Innovation on Economic Performance: a Study on Tunisian B2B Enterprises," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 2589-2606, March.
    13. 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).
    14. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen & Heidi Williams, 2019. "A toolkit of policies to promote innovation," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 10.
    15. Niklas Elert & Magnus Henrekson, 2019. "The collaborative innovation bloc: A new mission for Austrian economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 295-320, December.
    16. Buys, Laurie & Miller, Evonne, 2011. "Conceptualising convenience: Transportation practices and perceptions of inner-urban high density residents in Brisbane, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 289-297, January.
    17. Joel Blit & Mauricio Zelaya, 2015. "Do Firms Respond to Stronger Patent Protection by Doing More R&D?," Working Papers 1501, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
    18. Norbäck Pehr-Johan & Persson Lars & Olofsson Charlotta, 2020. "Acquisitions for Sleep," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, April.
    19. David S. Abrams & Ufuk Akcigit & Jillian Grennan, 2013. "Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption?," NBER Working Papers 19647, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Adam Karbowski, 2017. "Kontrowersje związane z moralnym uzasadnieniem ochrony patentowej w biotechnologii / Controversies over the Moral Justification for Patent Protection in Biotechnology," Annales. Ethics in Economic Life, University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, vol. 20(1), pages 83-94, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technological innovation; patent protection; conflict; U.S.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-01768893. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.