 |
Insider Trading and Corporate Innovation
|
Author: Katrin Hussinger, U. of Luxembourg
Author: Thomas Keusch, INSEAD
Author: Frank Moers, Maastricht U.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We examine how disclosure rules at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) have unintended real effects on insider trading opportunities and corporate innovation. The US patent application process provides a unique research setting that allows us to identify the exact point in time when insiders receive private information regarding the grant decision for pending patent applications from the USPTO. The American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA) of 2000, which made it mandatory to disclose patent applications within 18 months of the patent application date, regardless of whether a grant decision is already reached and communicated allows us to arrive at causal results. Supporting the claim that a reduction in insider trading opportunities decreases incentives to engage in innovation, difference-in-differences analyses reveal that corporate innovation output decreases post AIPA but only among firms that provide relatively low equity-based risk taking incentives to their executives.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transforming Regulatory Uncertainty into Scientific Creativity? The Case of Patent Attorneys
|
Author: Katharina Zangerle, U. of Innsbruck
Author: Leonhard Dobusch, U. of Innsbruck
Author: Sebastian Mader, U. of Innsbruck
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While patents are often treated as a measure and indicator of innovativeness, actors also recurrently have to deal with patent-related regulatory uncertainty. In this paper, we argue that legal professionals concerned with resolving such regulatory uncertainty have substantial consequences for innovative processes beyond mere legal advice. To address this issue, we examine practices of patent attorneys associated with patent-related uncertainties. Our findings show that patent attorneys adopt practices to track, uncover and rename patent-related uncertainties. By acting as boundary spanners at an inter-organization level, as well as absorbers and transformers of patent-related into scientific uncertainties, patent attorneys induce a scope for action on an organizational level. This bears the potential of evoking creative processes and sparking ideas. At the same time, with growing relevance of regulatory uncertainty grows the importance of and dependence on legal professionals even during creative phases of innovation processes.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have Academic Patents been Overestimated? An Analysis of University and Industry Spillovers.
|
Author: Thiago J. Soares, U. of São Paulo
Author: Solon Moreira, IESE Business School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous studies have compared the contributions of academic and firm inventions to economic development and technological innovation. This literature suggests that academic patents generate more knowledge spillovers than those of firms. However, these findings may be driven by spillovers that remain confined within academia, which could lead to an overestimation of the spillovers of university patents. In this study, we address this issue by using an approach that excludes inter-university knowledge flows as spillovers. Further, we also explore whether knowledge spillovers of universities are more or less localized than those of firms. Our findings indicate that university patents are indeed an important input for technologies of firms. We find evidence that firm technologies rely more often on academic patents than on technologies from other corporations. In addition, we show that industry patents are more important locally, whereas spillovers of academic patents appear to be less localized.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Variety and Intensity of IPR Application by Dutch Firms: a Five Year Account.
|
Author: Meindert Flikkema, Vrije U. Amsterdam
Author: Ard-Pieter De Man, U. of Amsterdam
Author: Marcel Seip, Vrije U. Amsterdam
Author: Carolina Castaldi, Eindhoven U. of Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Despite the growing reliance of firms on IPRs, the existing empirical evidence still provides a fragmented picture of the way firms combine them in different sectors. This is mainly a consequence of data filing in separate databases. This study therefore reports the firm-level and sector-level application of patents, trademarks, design rights and plant breeders’ rights by Dutch firms based on matched data from various IP offices covering a five year period. We study both the variety of IPR application and its intensity for firms across different industries and in different size classes. We conclude that both the distribution of firm-level IPR variety and intensity are right-skewed, particularly for small firms in supplier dominated industries. A cluster analysis covering the variety and intensity of IPR application, industry characteristics and firm size reveals that companies basically follow five different IPR application approaches, ranging from the ad hoc use of trademarks or patents to the serial combination of multiple IPRs. Based on these results we propose an agenda for research into the economics of combining IPRs for innovation portfolio purposes.
|
|
|
|
Paper is No Longer Available Online: Please contact the author(s).
|
|
|
|
|