Signaling and the Ownership of Academic Patents

Although in most countries, professors are legally obligated to disclose their inventions to their university\'s technology transfer office, the latter often does not have the real authority to enforce this rule. We here introduce a model that endogenizes a professor\'s decision of a form of transfer for her idea. If she does not disclose the idea to the transfer office, she still faces, on her own, both the difficulty of identifying a good match for her technology with a company and the incomplete information of the company on the quality of her idea. She can, however, signal that quality to the company at some cost which is decreasing with quality. We find four types of pure strategy equilibria of this signaling game. Taking these four types of equilibria into account, the model predicts that the company ownership of academic patents are associated with higher patent quality, greater inventor experience in technology transfer, and lower technology transfer office experience. We estimate the model and confirm its predictions on an original sample of 1,260 patent-professor pairs built on UK data. Specific attention is paid to the control of various forms of potential reverse causality of the type of patent applicant on patent quality.

[1]  David M. Kreps,et al.  Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria , 1987 .

[2]  Whitney K. Newey,et al.  Efficient estimation of limited dependent variable models with endogenous explanatory variables , 1987 .

[3]  D. Harhoff,et al.  Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions , 1999, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[4]  K. Arrow Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention , 1962 .

[5]  M. Trajtenberg A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .

[6]  Timo Fischer,et al.  Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions , 2014 .

[7]  James Bessen The Value of U.S. Patents by Owner and Patent Characteristics , 2006 .

[8]  Myriam Mariani,et al.  "Stacking" or "Picking" Patents? The Inventors' Choice Between Quantity and Quality , 2006 .

[9]  J. Davidson Frame,et al.  Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data , 1994 .

[10]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators , 2004 .

[11]  Daniel W. Elfenbein,et al.  Publications, Patents, and the Market for University Inventions , 2006 .

[12]  J. Tirole,et al.  Formal and Real Authority in Organizations , 1997, Journal of Political Economy.

[13]  Patrick Llerena,et al.  Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database , 2008 .

[14]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 19651988 , 1995, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[15]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition , 2001 .

[16]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[17]  J. Lerner The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis , 1994 .

[18]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  Changes in university patent quality after the Bayh-Dole act: a re-examination , 2003 .

[19]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Disclosure and licensing of University inventions: 'The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with' , 2003 .

[20]  Lee C. Adkins,et al.  Testing parameter significance in instrumental variables probit estimators: some simulation , 2012 .

[21]  D. Harhoff,et al.  Determinants of Opposition against EPO Patent Grants – The Case of Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals ∗ , 2002 .

[22]  Hélène Dernis,et al.  Measuring Patent Quality , 2013 .

[23]  Katrin Hussinger,et al.  The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions , 2012 .

[24]  Anne W. Fuller,et al.  Us Faculty Patenting: Inside and Outside the University , 2007 .

[25]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value , 2006 .

[26]  Mark Hirschey,et al.  Are Scientific Indicators of Patent Quality Useful to Investors? , 2004 .

[27]  Brian D. Wright,et al.  Technology Transfer under Asymmetric Information , 1990 .

[28]  Valerio Sterzi,et al.  Patent quality and ownership: an analysis of UK Faculty patenting , 2013 .

[29]  Ariel Pakes,et al.  Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries During Thepost-1950 Period , 1985 .

[30]  Federica Rossi,et al.  Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic patenting , 2011 .

[31]  Martin Kenney,et al.  Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model , 2009 .

[32]  A. Link,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to Engage In Informal University Technology Transfer , 2007 .

[33]  Martin Kenney,et al.  Does Inventor Ownership Encourage University Research-Derived Entrepreneurship? A Six University Comparison , 2011 .

[34]  Emmanuel Dechenaux,et al.  Inventor Moral Hazard in University Licensing: The Role of Contracts , 2008 .

[35]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention , 1997 .

[36]  David B. Audretsch,et al.  Does policy influence the commercialization route? Evidence from National Institutes of Health funded scientists , 2010 .

[37]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Market value and patent citations , 2005 .

[38]  Gideon D. Markman,et al.  Full-Time Faculty or Part-Time Entrepreneurs , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[39]  James J. Anton,et al.  Expropriation and Inventions: Appropriable Rents in the Absence of Property Rights , 1994 .