Sharing intellectual property rights - an exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies.

By John Hagedoorn. 2003

194 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/815dd6d8043156781a25374da944b518b9f9684e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones? (2018, background): “Since across-country co-patenting is infrequent (Hagedoorn, 2003; Belderbos et al., 2014), the number of families not eventually assigned to a unique geographical area was 0.78% of the sample.”
The Open Innovation Paradox: Knowledge Sharing and Protection in R&D Collaborations (2010, unknown): “At the same time, in recent years, there has been a rise in importance of patents and markets for technology (Arora et al., 2001; Bekkers and West, 2009; Granstrand, 2000; Hagedoorn, 2003; Jaffe, 2000) as well as the associated use of various licensing agreements (Bogers, 2010; de Laat, 2005; Granst”
Creating new technology through alliances: An empirical investigation of joint patents (2007, background): “In addition, given many firms’ aversion to sharing the ownership of proprietary technologies (Hagedoorn, 2003), we also introduce the variable of ‘‘repeated’’ alliance ties as a proxy for achieving a threshold level of trust, which is necessary to ease the appropriability risks of sharing…”
Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners (2014, methodology): “owned patents in the US increased steadily over time (Hagedoorn, 2003; Goossen, 2013) and the share of European Patent Office (EPO) co-patents in the patent portfolios of R&Dintensive firms remained stable between 1996 and 2003 (Belderbos et al.”
Collaboration Intensity and Regional Innovation Efficiency in Germany—A Conditional Efficiency Approach (2012, background): “Co-application agreements are complex and reasons for firms to engage in patent coapplication are manifold (see on this Hagedoorn, 2003).”
Contract Law and the Governance of Inter-Firm Technology Partnerships - An Analysis of Different Modes of Partnering and Their Contractual Implications (2007, unknown): “In addition, the clause seems in line with the current increase of joint patenting in the US biotechnological and pharmaceutical industry (Hagedoorn, 2003).”
Partner Geographic and Organizational Proximity and the Innovative Performance of Knowledge‐Creating Alliances (2014, unknown): “The period 1998–2003 was chosen because the number of joint patents started to increase significantly at the end of the 1990s (Hicks and Narin, 2001; Hagedoorn, 2003).”
Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey (2007, methodology): “The iterature has used this information to identify R&D ollaborations, and to proxy for the sharing of intelectual property rights (Hagedoorn, 2003).”
Applying social network analysis in economic geography: framing some key analytic issues (2009, background): “According to Hagedoorn (2003), this is due to the fact that companies view co-patenting as a ‘second best option’.”