Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effectiveness and Impact of Intellectual Property Rights: The Case of Digital Content Industry of Taiwan

  • Conference paper
Book cover Cultural Tourism in a Digital Era

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics ((SPBE))

  • 2286 Accesses

Abstract

The concept of Open Innovation (hereafter as OI) implies that ideas, resources and talents flow in and out of organization with the purpose that firms rely on external sources of innovation. This paper highlights an un-observed Intellectual property rights (IPRs) strategies in the current debate on open innovation, that is, the foundational question related to the decisive role of IPRs under which conditions of broadening openness is beneficial to appropriability of firms? The paper approaches this question by conceptualizing the degree of ‘openness’ in the literature and analyses the importance of IPRs strategies for innovation performance in the context of Taiwanese digital content industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andersen, B. (2004). “If ‘Intellectual Property Rights is the Answer, What is the Question?” Revisiting the Patent Controversies. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 13(5), 417–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, A., & Fosfuri, A. (2003). Licensing the market for technology. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 52, 277–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, A. (2007). Knowledge at work: Creative collaboration in the Global Economy. In Robert J. DeFillippi, Michael B. Arthur, & Valerie J. Lindsay. (Eds.), R&D Management, 37(3), 280–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basberg, B. L. (1987). Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 16, 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R., Duysters, G., & Verspagen, B. (2002). Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM”. Research Policy, 31, 1141–1161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., & Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond high tech: Early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management, 36(3), 229–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., Faulkner, D., & Tallman, S. (2005). Cooperative strategy: Managing alliances, networks and joint ventures (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J. F., Olesen, M. H., & Kjær, J. S. (2005). The industrial dynamics of open innovation—Evidence from the transformation of consumer electronics. Research Policy, 34(10), 1533–1549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (1998). Patent Portfolios for strategic R&D Planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15, 279–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Investment Services. (2007). The status of the digital content industry in Taiwan, http://sourcing.taiwantrade.com.tw/db/IndustryOverview/08.digital_content_industry.pdf

  • Freeman, C. (1991). Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues”. Research Policy, 20, 499–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 51, 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganguli, P. (2000). Intellectual property rights: mothering innovations to markets. World Patent Information, 22, 43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: Towards an agenda”. R&D Management, 36(3), 223–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., & Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: Three core process archetypes. R&D Management Conference (RADMA), Lisbon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grindley, P. C., & Teece, D. J. (1997). Managing intellectual capital: Licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics. California Management Review, 39, 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 371–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND Journal of Economics, 32, 101–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and Inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. (1998). Can patents deter innovation: The anti-commons in biomedical research. Science, 280, 698–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ihnen, J. L. (2000). A patent strategy for genomic and research tool patents: Are there any differences between the USA, Europe and Japan? Drug Discovery Today, 5, 554–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, U. (2002). An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: Evidence for the German service sector. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 20, 747–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufer, E. (1989). The economics of the patent system. Chur: Harwood Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Lee, K. (2003). Technological collaboration in the Korean electronic parts industry: Patterns and key success factors. R&D Management, 33, 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klevorick, A. K., Levin, R. C., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1995). On the sources and significance of inter-industry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy, 24(2), 185–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for Innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovative performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, 783–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiponen, A., Helfat, C. E. (2003). Innovation objectives, knowledge sources and the benefit of breadth. Paper presented at the What Do We Know About Innovation Conference: A Conference in Honour of Keith Pavitt, Freeman Centre, University of Sussex, Brighton, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-A. (Ed.). (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler, U., & Lichtenthaler, E. (2009). A capability-based framework for open innovation: Complementing absorptive capacity. Journal of Management Studies, 46(8), 1315–1338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, S. A., & Rumelt, R. P. (1982). Uncertain imitability: An analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics, 13, 418–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzoni, G., & Lipparini, A. (1999). The leveraging of inter firm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 20(4), 317–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, S. (2004). When means become ends: considering the impact of patent strategy on innovation. Information Economics and Policy, 16, 135–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mairesse, J., & Mohnen, P. (2002). Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application. American Economic Review, 92(2), 226–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1997). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data: The ‘Oslo Manual’. Paris: Organization for Economic Development and Co-operation.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O'Mahony, S., & Bechky, B. A. (2008). Boundary organizations: Enabling collaboration among unexpected allies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 422–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. L. R., Robson, M., & Townsend, J. (1987). The size distribution of innovating firms in the UK: 1945–1983. Journal of Industrial Economics, 35(3), 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. L. R., Robson, M., & Townsend, J. (1989). Accumulation, diversification and organization of technological activities in U.K. companies, 1945–83. Management Science, 35, 81–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1998). Technologies, products and organization in the innovating firm: What Adam Smith tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn’t. Industrial and Corporate Change, 7(3), 433–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. P. (1984). Towards a strategic theory of the firm: Competitive strategic management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, M. A. (2008). Strategic management of technological innovation (Internationalth ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, C. (2001). Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard-setting. In A. Jaffe, J. Lerner, & S. Scott (Eds.), Innovation policy and the economy (Vol. 1). Ma, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader, R. C. (2001). Collaboration and performance in foreign markets: The case of young high technology manufacturing firms. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shy, O. (2001). The economics of network industries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Somaya, D. (2003). Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15, 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tether, B. S. (2005). Do services innovate (differently)? Insights from the European Innobarometer survey. Industry and Innovation, 12(2), 153–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thumm, N. (2001). Management of intellectual property rights in European Biotechnology Firms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67, 259–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisenfeld, U., Reeves, J. C., & Hunck-Meiswinkel, A. (2001). Technology management and collaboration profile: Virtual companies and industrial platforms in the high- tech biotechnology industries. R&D Management, 31(1), 91–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J., & Gallagher, S. (2006a). Challenges of open innovation: The paradox of firm investment in open-source software. R&D Management, 36(3), 319–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J., & Gallagher, S. (2006b). Patterns of open innovation in open source software. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm (pp. 82–106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziedonis, R. H. (2004). Do not fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Science, 50, 804–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan under Grant [NSC 99- 2410-H-018-001].”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Education and Technology, National Changhua University of Education, Bao-Shan Campus, No.2, Shi-Da Road, Changhua 500, Changhua city, Taiwan, Taiwan

    Chih-cheng Lo

Authors
  1. Chih-cheng Lo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chih-cheng Lo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Technological Educational Institute, Athens, Greece

    Vicky Katsoni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lo, Cc. (2015). The Effectiveness and Impact of Intellectual Property Rights: The Case of Digital Content Industry of Taiwan. In: Katsoni, V. (eds) Cultural Tourism in a Digital Era. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15859-4_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation