Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Dunner Dunner, Jakes Jakes, Karceski Karceski (1995)
A Statistical Look at the Federal Circuit's Patent Decisions; 1982–1994Federal Circuit Bar Journal, 5
Griliches Griliches (1990)
Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A SurveyJournal of Economic Literature, 28
Lunney Lunney (2001)
E‐ObviousnessMichigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, 7
Hunt Hunt (1999)
Patent Reform: A Mixed Blessing for the U.S. Economy?Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Review
Burk Burk, Lemley Lemley (2002)
Is Patent Law Technology Specific?Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 17
Hausman Hausman, Hall Hall, Griliches Griliches (1984)
Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents‐R&D RelationshipEconometrica, 52
Rai Rai (2003)
Engaging Facts and Policy: A Multi‐Institutional Approach to Patent System ReformColumbia Law Review, 106
Pakes Pakes, Griliches Griliches (1984)
Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First LookEconomic Letters, 5
Cunningham Cunningham (1995)
Preliminary Injunctive Relief in Patent LitigationIDEA, 35
Hunt Hunt (2001)
You Can Patent That? Are Patents on Computer Programs and Business Methods Good for the New Economy?Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Review, 1st Quarter
Hunt Hunt (2006)
When Do Patents Reduce R&DAmerican Economic Review, 96
Kortum Kortum, Lerner Lerner (1999)
What Is Behind the Recent Surge in Patenting?Research Policy, 28
Scherer Scherer (1982b)
Demand‐Pull and Technological Invention: Schmookler RevisitedJournal of Industrial Economics, 30
Cohen Cohen, Lemley Lemley (2001)
Patent Scope and Innovation in the Software IndustryCalifornia Law Review, 89
Grindley Grindley, Teece Teece (1997)
Managing Intellectual Capital: Licensing and Cross‐Licensing in Semiconductors and ElectronicsCalifornia Management Review, 39
Lemley Lemley, O'Brien O'Brien (1997)
Encouraging Software Re‐UseStanford Law Review, 49
Samuelson Samuelson (1990)
Benson Revisited: The Case Against Patent Protection For Algorithms and Other Computer Program‐Related InventionsEmory Law Review, 39
Scherer Scherer (1965)
Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented InventionsAmerican Economic Review, 55
Kemerer Kemerer (1992)
How the Learning Curve Affects CASE Tool AdoptionIEEE Software, 9
Dam Dam (1995)
Some Economic Considerations in the Intellectual Property Protection of SoftwareJournal of Legal Studies, 24
Allison Allison, Lemley Lemley (2000)
Who's Patenting What? An Empirical Exploration of Patent ProsecutionVanderbilt Law Review, 58
Levin Levin, Klevorick Klevorick, Nelson Nelson, Winter Winter (1987)
Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and DevelopmentBrookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3
Graham Graham, Mowery Mowery (2004)
Submarines in Software: Continuations in U.S. Software Patenting in the 1980s and 1990sEconomics of Innovation and New Technology, 13
Lanjouw Lanjouw, Lerner Lerner (2001)
Tilting the Table? The Use of Preliminary InjunctionsJournal of Law and Economics, 44
Scherer Scherer (1982a)
The Office of Technology Assessment and Forecast Industry Concordance as a Means of Identifying Industry Technology OriginsWorld Patent Information, 4
Hall Hall, Ziedonis Ziedonis (2001)
The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979–1995RAND Journal of Economics, 32
Merges Merges (1999)
As Many as Six Impossible Patents Before Breakfast: Property Rights for Business Concepts and Patent System ReformBerkeley Technology Law Journal, 14
Coolley Coolley (1994)
The Status of Obviousness and How to Assert It as a DefenseJournal of the Patent and Trademarks Office Society, 76
Griliches Griliches, Hall Hall, Hausman Hausman (1986)
Patents and R&D: Is There a Lag?International Economic Review, 27
Software patents have grown rapidly in number and now comprise 15% of all patents. They are acquired primarily by large manufacturing firms in industries known for strategic patenting; only 5% belong to software publishers. The very large increase in software patent propensity over time is not adequately explained by changes in R&D investments, employment of computer programmers, or productivity growth. The residual increase in software patent propensity is consistent with a sizeable increase in the cost effectiveness of software patents during the 1990s, perhaps arising from changes in the application of patent law to computer software.
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy – Wiley
Published: Mar 1, 2007
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.