Synonyms
Innovation policy; Intellectual property rights; Markets for technology; Open innovation; R&D collaboration
A patent gives to its owner an exclusive right on a product or process which is new, inventive, and has an industrial application (in the USA, this third criterion is broader in the sense that the invention needs not to have an industrial application but must merely be useful). From a legal point of view, a patent is a negative right. It gives the right to exclude but not necessarily to use an invention, if this use leads to infringe a right held by someone else. The maximum duration of the patent protection is 20 years after the first application (but a majority of patents does not last this long). Also, in most countries, patent applicants must provide a description of their invention which, 18 months after the first application, is made public (made available to everybody). The description must be sufficiently clear and exhaustive in order to allow a person knowing...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A. Markets for technology: the economics of innovation and corporate strategy. Cambridge: MIT press; Mass 2001.
Arora A, Merges R. Specialized supply firms, property rights and firm boundaries. Ind Corp Change. 2004;13:451–75.
Arrow KJ. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1962. p. 609–25.
Chesbrough H. Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 2003.
Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh J. Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER working paper 7552, 2000.
Grindley P, Teece D. Managing intellectual capital: licensing and cross-licensing in semi-conductors and electronics. Calif Manage Rev. 1997;39:8–41.
Heller MA, Eisenberg RS. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science. 1998;280:698–701.
Jaffe A. The US patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process. Res Policy. 2000;29:531–57.
Jaffe A, Lerner J. Innovation and its discontents: how our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2004.
Kingston W. Innovation needs patent reform. Res Policy. 2001;30:403–23.
Levin RC, Klevorick K, Nelson RR, Winter S. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brooking Pap Econ Activity. 1987;3:783–820.
Mazzoleni R, Nelson RR. The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: a contribution to the current debate. Res Policy. 1998;27:273–84.
Pénin J, Wack J-P. Research tool patents and free-libre biotechnology: a unified perspective. Res Policy. 2008;37(10):1909–21.
Scotchmer S. Innovation and incentives. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2004.
Shapiro C. Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting. Innov Policy Econ. 2000;1:119–50.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media LLC
About this entry
Cite this entry
Pénin, J. (2013). Patents and Entrepreneurship. In: Carayannis, E.G. (eds) Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_416
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3858-8_416
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-3857-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-3858-8
eBook Packages: Business and Economics