IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/iirwps/16-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Claim Length as a Value Predictor of a Patent

Author

Listed:
  • OKADA, Yoshimi
  • 岡田, 吉美
  • NAITO, Yusuke
  • 内藤, 祐介
  • NAGAOKA, Sadao
  • 長岡, 貞男

Abstract

The claim of a patent defines the scope of patent right and provides crucial information on patent value. However, most empirical research uses only the number of claims as an indicator of patent value. We show that the breadth of a claim of Japanese patents, measured by the inverse of claim length, has significant explanatory power for patent value measured by applicant forward citations. Indeed, the explanatory power of claim breadth is comparable with that of the number of claims. The predictive power of claim breadth is stable for all quantiles in the discrete technology area, while it is far more significant for top-ranked patents in the complex technology area.

Suggested Citation

  • OKADA, Yoshimi & 岡田, 吉美 & NAITO, Yusuke & 内藤, 祐介 & NAGAOKA, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男, 2016. "Claim Length as a Value Predictor of a Patent," IIR Working Paper 16-04, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:hit:iirwps:16-04
    Note: Revised in May 2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/28165/070iirWP16-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    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. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Emilio Raiteri & Rudi Bekkers, 2023. "Discrimination in the Patent System: Evidence from Standard-Essential Patents," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66(4), pages 739-763.
    2. Arianna Martinelli & Julia Mazzei, 2022. "Death squad or quality improvement? The impact of introducing post-grant review on U.S. patent quality," LEM Papers Series 2022/34, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    3. Bekkers, Rudi & Martinelli, Arianna & Tamagni, Federico, 2020. "The impact of including standards-related documentation in patent prior art: Evidence from an EPO policy change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    4. OKADA Yoshimi & NAITO Yusuke & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2016. "Contribution of Patent Examination to Making the Patent Scope Consistent with the Invention: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 16092, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    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. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    2. Yi Deng, 2003. "A Dynamic Stochastic Analysis of International Patent Application and Renewal Processes," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 189, Society for Computational Economics.
    3. Alex Coad & Rekha Rao, 2007. "The employment effects of innovation," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne r07036, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    4. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Luzzi, Alessandra, 2007. "The market for patents in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1163-1183, October.
    5. Anna Rita Bennato & Stephen Davies & Franco Mariuzzo & Peter Ormosi, 2019. "Mergers and Innovation: Evidence from the Hard Disk Drive Market," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2018-04v3, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    6. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    7. Laarni Bulan & Paroma Sanyal, 2011. "Incentivizing managers to build innovative firms," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 267-283, May.
    8. 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.
    9. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    10. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    11. Gamal Atallah & Gabriel Rodríguez, 2006. "Indirect patent citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(3), pages 437-465, June.
    12. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    13. Grashuis Jasper & Dary Stanley, 2019. "Patented Innovation and Firm Value in the U.S. Food and Drink Industry: The Economic Importance of High-Quality Product Innovation," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 1-14, November.
    14. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Yann Ménière & Myra Mohnen, 2017. "International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 793-828, May.
    15. Coad, Alex & Rao, Rekha, 2008. "Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 633-648, May.
    16. L. Kamran Bilir, 2014. "Patent Laws, Product Life-Cycle Lengths, and Multinational Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(7), pages 1979-2013, July.
    17. Huang, Can & Jacob, Jojo, 2014. "Determinants of quadic patenting: Market access, imitative threat, competition and strength of intellectual property rights," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 4-16.
    18. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    19. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley & Lee, Honggi & Sebastian, Divya, 2023. "Invention value, inventive capability and the large firm advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    20. M. D. Beneish & C. R. Harvey & A. Tseng & P. Vorst, 2022. "Unpatented innovation and merger synergies," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 706-744, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Claim length; patent value; quantile regression; discrete technology; complex technology; applicant forward citation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:hit:iirwps:16-04. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iihitjp.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.