Search results

The purpose of the paper is to advance a framework that can assess and analyze the value of patent portfolios. On this purpose, the framework develops a conceptual and comprehensive index, the patent portfolio value index (PPVI), to assess the patent innovation level and suggest economic-strategic guidelines.

The authors have designed and applied a framework that synthesizes into a single index the results of a multiple criteria approach, based on information derived from quantitative objective data (claims, citations, and market coverage), information related to qualitative determinants (strategic positioning and economic importance), and information derived from decision makers’ perceptions and judgments.

The authors have applied the PPVI to the 3,532 patent portfolio documents in an Italian worldwide player in aerospace and defense market. The combined analysis, provided by the PPVI and a qualitative synoptic representation, has made it possible to understand the strategic positioning and alignment of patents with the core business of the company. The results of the analysis have provided managers with the necessary suggestions regarding action items to be performed: to reinforce, license, try to dismiss, or sell some of the examined patents of the portfolios.

The PPVI supplies a quick procedure to ascertain the profitability of patents and accounts for the value of a patent portfolio from an internal business perspective.

As it is built and defined, the PPVI shows elements of novelty compared to the other indexes existing in the literature, in that it follows a multiple criteria approach by merging quantitative and qualitative information.

The purpose of this paper is the development of a patent-based supplier portfolio that can be used to evaluate and select suppliers on account of their technological competencies.

In addition to traditional approaches, the authors develop a supplier portfolio that characterizes suppliers according to the similarity between supplier's and OEM's technological competencies as well as their technological broadness. These variables are measured on the basis of patents, which constitute a valuable source of information in technology-driven industries. Contrary to existing binary measurement approaches, the authors’ portfolio uses semantic analyses to make use of the specific information provided in the patents' texts. The authors test this method in the field of gearings, which is a key driver for the automotive industry.

The authors identify six generic positions, characterizing specific risks for an OEM to become either technologically dependent or dependent on suppliers' production capacities. For each position the authors develop specific management strategies in face of the aforementioned risks. The approach helps OEMs navigate in the competitive landscape based on the most recent and publicly available information medium.

This work explicitly applies the construct of technological competencies to supplier evaluation and selection on the basis of portfolio approaches. Furthermore, the authors improve the use of patents for supplier evaluation in two respects: First, the authors analyze OEMs and upstream suppliers on an organizational level. Second, the authors utilize advanced semantic analysis to generate variables for the measurement of the criteria mentioned above.

Several causes may induce firm managers to analyze the actual technology condition of patent portfolios, among which is the need of exploiting patents strategically. In this paper, the question of how to support intellectual property (IP) managers of large high technology companies in their strategic decision-making process of evaluating patents is examined. The purpose of this paper is to provide a decision support framework that suggests the suitable exploitation strategy for patents.

The paper proposes an audit framework able to point out whether patents are aligned to the overall business strategy, to select those that are not aligned, and to identify the most appropriate exploitation strategy for each patent of the portfolio. The framework is structured into two phases: in the first one, patents are selected through the analysis of four dimensions that characterize the value of patents effectively; in the second one, a questionnaire is distributed to IP managers in order to support their decision on patents. The paper illustrates case-based applications of the framework.

Results of applications show that the framework is able to suggest IP managers the suitable exploitation strategy on four possible alternatives (maintaining, licensing, selling, abandoning) for each patent of their portfolios.

The framework is an innovative and valuable tool to IP managers, and besides its structural formulation, it is appreciable in terms of application expedition and efficiency of performance.

The authors argue that the patent term change introduced in Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in the USA inadvertently offered a metric of self-valuation of patents at the time of filing, affirming the ability of Drugs and Chemical patents to offer greater R&D incentives than other technology fields. As renewals also offer a metric of self-valuation, the authors find that upon renewal Computer patents are found to offer greater R&D incentives than Drugs and Chemicals. The purpose of this paper is to inquire as to why Computer patents are considered as more valuable in the post grant period, even though they were not considered as valuable upon filing. The authors advance the idea that patents can increase in value if encompassed in a patent portfolio.

The authors employ the introduction of the TRIPS agreement in the USA. In order to facilitate the move to TRIPS, the USPTO (unexpectedly) allowed applicants who filed prior to June 8, 1995 a patent length that was equal to the maximum of two regimes. Therefore, applicants that filed before the deadline were given a possible small extension of their patent’s time length. The authors use this change and renewal data to infer firms’ self-valuation of patents. For this reason, the authors acquire information for all utility patents that were filed around June 8, 1995 data project.

The authors offer an additional explanation that is related to the increasingly commonplace build up of patent portfolios: patents can increase in value if encompassed in a portfolio. Such portfolios are bundles of patents whose means to an end lays in their strength in numbers. As Lanjouw and Schankerman (2004) note, when a patent is added to a portfolio the cost of defending a technology against infringement allegations decreases. To rephrase, a patent is regarded as the additional foot-soldier who aids the firm, arm-in-arm, in defending its technological territory and in fulfilling its strategic goal.

The originality stemming from the paper is that policy makers that aim to tackle patent proliferation should not focus their attention to individual patents. Instead, they should target policies toward patent portfolios, because they provide the means of endowing patents with the extra weight that makes filing and renewing irrelevant patents worthwhile.

The development of oil shale has become a popular technique in the energy industry in recent years. Although more research attention has been paid to this topic, there are scanty studies on patent portfolios. This study aims to explore this current mainstream technique and the patent portfolios of oil shale developers and investigates the major assignees at present to find the technical development trend of oil shale as a reference for government, policy makers, investors and industrial strategic development.

This study applies correspondence analysis and K-means clustering analysis on data mining and probes into the competitive techniques and strategic groups of the main enterprises in the oil shale industry. In addition, by approval dates, this study analyzes technical directions and the development trends of the current main oil shale enterprises.

The findings show differences in the enterprises regarding technical positions and patent portfolio strategies.

Differential positioning analysis suggests the relative technical advantages of the various enterprises and evaluates the competition among oil shale enterprises.

We examine the patenting behavior of firms in an industry characterized by rapid technological change and cumulative innovation. Recent survey evidence suggests that semiconductor firms do not rely heavily on patents to appropriate returns to R&D. Yet the propensity of semiconductor firms to patent has risen dramatically since the mid-1980s. We explore this apparent paradox by conducting interviews with industry representatives and analyzing the patenting behavior of 95 U.S. semiconductor firms during 1979–1995. The results suggest that the 1980s strengthening of U.S. patent rights spawned “patent portfolio races” among capital-intensive firms, but it also facilitated entry by specialized design firms.

Considering that SMEs are widely recognized as important innovators and, in the past years, have registered increasing levels of patenting, the purpose of this paper is to unveil the impact of both internal and external knowledge sourcing on SME patenting performance and test the moderating role of formal plan for innovation and absorptive capacity.

The authors propose an econometric approach based on a Hurdle Count Data Model which allows the authors not only to overcome problems related to the count dependent variables often assuming zero values, but also to separate patent propensity from patent portfolio size.

This methodology puts in evidence that an internal factor (i.e. employee skills for innovation) significantly influences SME patent propensity, while an external factor (i.e. open innovation with business partners) impacts SME portfolio size. Moreover, both formal plan for innovation and absorptive capacity play an important moderating role.

This paper embraces a knowledge perspective to investigate the determinants of SME patenting, which contributes to the knowledge-based view of the firm in the SME domain. Moreover, differently from most studies in the area of patenting which adopt a macro-level perspective and rely on secondary data, it assumes a firm-level approach and bases on primary data, which contributes to make it particularly distinctive.

The purpose of this paper is to examine, for a sample of ten corporations in three industries (i.e. automotive suppliers, semiconductors, and computer networks), the different strategies that firms undertake when acquiring patent-protected technologies. In particular, the authors analyze and compare two alternative channels for patent acquisition: markets for technology (MFT) and merger and acquisition (M&A) processes.

The authors implement two types of analyses, at both patent and firm level. First, the authors perform an econometric analysis to evaluate whether acquired patented technologies differ in their patent bibliographic characteristics with respect to patent-protected technologies that have been developed internally by the examined firms. The authors then investigate the presence of differences in the characteristics of transacted patents acquired in the MFT or by means of M&A activities. Second, the authors take a firm-level perspective and examine the technology acquisition strategies adopted by selected companies to identify the presence of common patterns, industry-driven specificities and firm peculiarities.

The authors find that acquired patented technologies are, on average, more complex, of higher technical merit and the corresponding patents show a higher legal robustness. Econometric results reveal the presence of differences between M&A and MFT patents: the latter seem to protect less complex, and thus easier to trade, inventions. The analysis of the patterns of patent acquisitions at the firm level shows the presence of different strategies for the external sourcing of patented technologies, based on whether acquired patents protect core or non-core technology areas of the analyzed firms. Such patterns are discussed in the light of the different streams of the literature on intellectual property (IP) management.

This paper makes use of a new and comprehensive data set of the US patent transactions that took place between 2002 and 2010. The authors added detailed data on the evolution of the corporate trees of analyzed firms. The paper contributes to the literature on technology acquisitions and MFT by examining the different channels for patented technology acquisitions. The issue represents an emerging area of interest in the field of IP management.

Patent litigation consists of non-market actions that firms undertake to access intellectual property rights defined by prior legislation and enforced by the courts. Thus, patent litigation provides an interesting context in which to explore aspects of firm’s non-market strategies. In contrast with prior non-market strategy research that has largely focused on how political institutions define the rules of the game for market competition, non-market actions within patent litigation primarily seek to access and apply these broad policies to specific situations, products, or assets that matter to the firm. Furthermore, because such non-market actions are directly influenced by the firms’ market strategies, they represent a promising area for research on integrated (market and non-market) strategies as well.

The goal of this paper is to explain how generic patent strategies that firms use to support their competitive advantage in the product-market influence non-market outcomes related to the timing of patent litigation resolution. In contrast with prior research that has studied settlement in patent litigation essentially as a one-shot bargaining game, this paper seeks to explain litigation resolution as an outcome of the competing mechanisms of settlement and adjudication that operate continually during litigation. Using a large sample of patent litigations in research medicines and computers, I model the timing of patent litigation resolution in a proportional hazards framework, wherein settlement and adjudication are competing risks. The evidence found is consistent with the proposition that the speed with which patent litigation is resolved by either settlement or adjudication reflects the use of proprietary, defensive, and leveraging patent strategies by firms. These findings also help to explain unexpected and anomalous findings regarding the settlement of patent litigation reported in prior research.

Firms may suffer differently from the patent thickets in a particular technology field. This paper explores how patent thickets affect the financial performance of firms with different patent propensities and technological leadership.

From the perspective of patent strategy, the authors study how patent propensity, the possibility that a firm applies for patents, affects the patent thickets and financial performance. Additionally, this paper uses patent stock to measure technological leadership, the degree to which a firm can develop, maintain and enhance technology and product innovation, to study the impact of patent propensity on firms. A three-way interaction model is used to explore the relationship among patent thickets, patent propensity, technological leadership and financial performance based on an unbalanced panel of 69 Chinese telecommunication equipment firms from 2008 to 2019.

The authors find that patent propensity positively moderates patent thickets and financial performance. Notably, technological leadership negatively moderates the moderating effect of patent propensity.

This paper enriches the heterogeneous literature of patent thickets and financial performance. It sheds light on the fact that firms with different technological leadership may use different patent strategies to cut through patent thickets.