Search results

I begin with a dispute over a fox hunt, by which to understand the law of tangible property, then develop that metaphor for the major types of intellectual property. I start with domestic U.S. patent law for the sake of concreteness, and generalize to other jurisdictions and types of intellectual property. In the latter parts of the paper I discuss the international implications of intellectual property, including especially the effects of information spillovers. The last part of the paper describes the hazards in analogizing “trade” in intellectual property rights to trade in goods, and particularly in interpreting international patent data. These hazards motivate the search for a structural model specially adapted to the purpose of valuing international intellectual property rights and rules. The goal is to give economists a simple and integrated framework for analyzing intellectual property across time, jurisdiction and regime type, with an eye towards eventually developing other incentive systems that have the advantages of property (such as decentralized decision-making), but fewer of the disadvantages.

As firms turn their innovation activities toward collaborating with external partners, they face additional challenges in managing their knowledge. While different modes of intellectual property right regimes are applied in closed innovation systems, there seems to be tension between the concepts of “open innovation” and “intellectual property rights”. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how firms best manage knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes.

Following a mixed methods approach, the authors review relevant literature at the intersection of knowledge management, intellectual property rights, strategic management of intellectual property rights and the open innovation process. The authors identify success drivers through the lenses of – but not limited to – intellectual property rights and classify them in five distinct groups. Expending the view on open innovation beyond its modus operandi, the authors develop the Open Innovation Life Cycle, covering three stages and three levels of the open innovation process. The authors apply their findings to a case study in the pharmaceutical industry.

The authors provide four key contributions. First, existing literature yields inconclusive results concerning the enabling or disabling function of intellectual property rights in open innovation processes, but the majority of scholars detect an ambivalent relation. Second, they identify and classify success drivers of successful knowledge management via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Third, they advance literature on open innovation beyond its modus operandi to include three stages and three levels. Fourth, they test their findings to a case study and show how management leverages knowledge by properly using intellectual property rights in open innovation.

The findings support firms in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Management should account for the peculiarities of open innovation preparation and open innovation termination to prevent unintentional knowledge drain.

This is one of the first studies to view open innovation as a process beyond its modus operandi by considering the preparations for and termination of open innovation activities. It also addresses the levels involved in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation from individual (personal) to project and firm level.

Observes that variances in standards for and interpretations of intellectual property rights (IPR) around the globe remain one of the great challenges for marketers and stakeholders of the marketing paradigm. Attempts to distil the issues surrounding IPR and its protection, and to examine the phenomenon of IPR violations within a framework of social dilemmas. In so doing, describes and provides examples for some of the problems associated with IPR violations. Contends that much work is still to be done, if it is hoped to implement a global system for IPR protection that serves the best long‐term interests for the largest number of society’s stakeholders. Concludes with opportunities for further research.

This paper aims to focus on how small knowledge‐intensive business service (KIBS) firms manage their knowledge‐based processes, or what are termed “intellectual assets”.

The paper is based on data collected from a sample of small KIBS firms located in Scotland. The methodological approach is novel in that it utilises the results of an online benchmarking tool allowing firms to gauge their intellectual asset base in comparison with other firms.

The paper finds that approaches to the strategic management of intellectual assets vary significantly according the size and type of KIBS firm. Differences in these approaches impact on the development of effective innovation processes, with resource deficiencies in smaller firms constraining their innovation capability.

It is concluded that small KIBS firms face particular challenges in managing the innovation process and establishing sustainable knowledge management practices, and may benefit from targeted policy intervention.

Unlike many other studies of KIBS firms, this paper focuses on how small KIBS firms manage their own knowledge processes as part of their strategic management approach for creating competitive advantage.

There is no proposed solution to address the unresolved issues of constructing the Chinese university intellectual property information service system (IPISS) to promote the whole process service efficiency of IP creation, utilization, protection and management. The purpose of this paper is to propose a complete system, including theoretical framework and system development which addresses the existing difficulties to IP create, protect and transfer for researchers in universities. The paper shares the practice of utilizing the system developed by Wuhan University IP research team known as Wuhan University Intellectual Property Information Service System (WHU-IPISS).

First, the IPISS of 23 universities in China was investigated on the internet. Aiming at the deficiencies of the system, such as single service type, lack of patent display window, low management efficiency. This paper constructs the theoretical framework, proposes the IP ecological chain model, divides it into four sub-chains and carries on the functional design. Further, under the theoretical framework, the IPISS was developed, including the resource supply management system, user demand matching system, resource assessment system and expert support system. Finally, the system was applied to Wuhan University to provide IP services in the whole process for university researchers.

WHU-IPISS realizes the functions of IP resource supply, demand matching, value evaluation and expert support. It solves the IP needs of university researchers and provides a guarantee for their technology research, patent portfolio, patent transfer and patent rights protection. It also improves the efficiency of IP service and can construct the IP ecosphere in universities.

The WHU-IPISS solution resolves issues of “How to develop the university IP whole process service model, fulfilling the IP service needs for universities' researchers”. The software will be released as open-source for other universities' use. The publishing model is also useful for those universities that intend to implement the IPISS.

This chapter provides an overview of the five main modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and designs – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

The blockchain technology provides a way to record transactions that is designed to be highly secure, transparent, trustable, traceable, auditable and tamper-proof. And, the internet of things (IoT) technology provides the ability to transfer data over a network without requiring human-to-human or human-to-computer interaction, which is able to link computing devices and digitized machines, things, objects, animals and people that are provided with digital unique identifiers (UIDs). This paper aims to explore the combined application of blockchain and IoT-based technologies, especially on the intellectual property protection area.

In this paper, the authors propose a high-level architecture design of blockchain and IoT-based intellectual property protection system, which can help to process three types of intellectual property: (1) patents, copyrights, trademarks etc.; (2) industrial design, trade dress, craft works, trade secrets etc.; and (3) plant variety rights, geographical indications, etc.

Using blockchain peer-to-peer network and IoT devices, the proposed method can help people to establish a trusted, self-organized, open and ecological intellectual property protection system.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first work that applied blockchain and IoT technologies on traditional intellectual property protection and trade ecosystem.

Since 2015, China has made efforts to reform its intellectual property rights (IPR) system to better protect and stimulate innovation. These reforms are a result of the demand for more stringent intellectual property (IP) protection from China’s domestic, innovative industries and a measure to ease the pressure exerted by its foreign trading partners, particularly against the background of the US-China trade dispute that started at the beginning of 2018. This paper summarizes these reforms and their implications.

This paper combines a variety of sources, including academic articles, government websites, news reports, industry surveys and expert opinions, to offer insights in China’s IPR system and its recent reforms.

This paper summarizes and discusses (1) the state’s law amendments, including the 2015 amendment of the “Law on Promoting the Transformation of Scientific and Technological Achievements”, the second amendment of the “Anti-Unfair Competition Law” with regard to trade secret protection, the fourth amendment of the “Patent Law”, and the legislations and regulations addressing the criticisms of the US administration over China’s so-called “forced” technology transfer policies; (2) the establishment of the specialized IP courts and tribunals since 2014; (3) the restructuring of the State IP Office; and (4) the issuing of an “Outline for Building an IPR Powerhouse (2021–2035)”.

This paper highlights China’s efforts to make its IPR system stronger and more just. It also discusses international observers’ reactions and pinpoints specific areas for further improvement.

The study aims to explore the interplay between open innovation and intellectual property. Differently from previous studies, we argue that open innovation fosters firm's patenting activity.

We use linear regression analysis to test model's hypotheses. Data are drawn from the Eurostat statistics and refer to a large sample of European firms (NACE Rev.2).

The findings confirm that open innovation fosters patenting activity in health care, also thanks to huge governments' expenditures in this market.

The study focuses solely on European firms and it adopts a traditional linear approach. So, we cannot exclude that different dynamics may occur across European borders. Future research should address this concern by focusing on multi-country comparative studies.

Open innovation is the most suitable model for health industry, because it improves both innovation performance and intellectual capital of firms.

The study tackles an existing gap of the literature by considering how the presence of large customers impacts the strength of intellectual property protection.