Search results

As firms turn their innovation activities toward collaborating with external partners, they face additional challenges in managing their knowledge. While different modes of intellectual property right regimes are applied in closed innovation systems, there seems to be tension between the concepts of “open innovation” and “intellectual property rights”. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how firms best manage knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes.

Following a mixed methods approach, the authors review relevant literature at the intersection of knowledge management, intellectual property rights, strategic management of intellectual property rights and the open innovation process. The authors identify success drivers through the lenses of – but not limited to – intellectual property rights and classify them in five distinct groups. Expending the view on open innovation beyond its modus operandi, the authors develop the Open Innovation Life Cycle, covering three stages and three levels of the open innovation process. The authors apply their findings to a case study in the pharmaceutical industry.

The authors provide four key contributions. First, existing literature yields inconclusive results concerning the enabling or disabling function of intellectual property rights in open innovation processes, but the majority of scholars detect an ambivalent relation. Second, they identify and classify success drivers of successful knowledge management via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Third, they advance literature on open innovation beyond its modus operandi to include three stages and three levels. Fourth, they test their findings to a case study and show how management leverages knowledge by properly using intellectual property rights in open innovation.

The findings support firms in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation processes. Management should account for the peculiarities of open innovation preparation and open innovation termination to prevent unintentional knowledge drain.

This is one of the first studies to view open innovation as a process beyond its modus operandi by considering the preparations for and termination of open innovation activities. It also addresses the levels involved in managing knowledge via intellectual property rights in open innovation from individual (personal) to project and firm level.

Although a large number of Arab countries are members of the World Trade Organisation and the Agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, most of these countries were unable to structure a national intellectual property protection regime which takes into consideration their development plans. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the history of Arab countries' participation in multilateral trade and intellectual property negotiations and calls for the maximum utilisation by these countries of the intellectual property policy space available to them under international law.

The paper draws from the texts of international agreements and from the available literature on intellectual property. The paper also makes use of various international reports and studies on intellectual property and development.

The paper argues that due to the minimal participation and involvement by Arab countries in international trade and intellectual property negotiations, officials in these countries lacked deep knowledge and understanding about the technical and legal issues engulfing the regulation and implementation of intellectual property. The paper finds that those countries mostly active in negotiations were more able to capitalise on the system and to benefit from the available policy space in terms of national development. Finally, the paper provides recommendations aimed towards enhancing the policy space and utilising intellectual property for development purposes.

These findings are important for policy makers, officials and those interested in understanding the relation between intellectual property protection and development and how developing and Arab countries would be able to maximize the benefits from the international protection regime.

Observes that variances in standards for and interpretations of intellectual property rights (IPR) around the globe remain one of the great challenges for marketers and stakeholders of the marketing paradigm. Attempts to distil the issues surrounding IPR and its protection, and to examine the phenomenon of IPR violations within a framework of social dilemmas. In so doing, describes and provides examples for some of the problems associated with IPR violations. Contends that much work is still to be done, if it is hoped to implement a global system for IPR protection that serves the best long‐term interests for the largest number of society’s stakeholders. Concludes with opportunities for further research.

This paper examines the evolution of Intellectual Property (IP) commercialization in historical perspective. IP Law imposes an incentive structure that determines the extent of societal investment in those assets. From their inception at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, IP has expanded due to the introduction of new technologies. Property rights allocation over these assets has traditionally been assigned to governments centralizing the recognition of such property. For a long period of time, government intervention was critical to allow IP commercialization; hence, the political economy of IP was dictated by the prevailing ideology of policymakers in favor or against market transactions. The resulting clash of ideologies has marked the position of developing countries seeking exclusions from open IP commercialization to obtain temporary relief from foreign competition of technology producing countries, as well as that of industrialized countries, seeking to export their technologies overseas. The emergence of blockchain technology, as a decentralized transaction exchange protocol that makes intermediary centralized institutions (i.e. governments) certifying IP irrelevant over a large portion of intellectual property (i.e., trade secrets and copyrights) will create revolutionary institutions facilitating IP commercialization, such as NFTs. We examine this historical evolution in the context of legal institutions governing intellectual property transactions and technology transfer.

The major findings of this exploratory research are that a firm’s level of market commitment through future investments will increase in strategically important markets, regardless of high consumer complicity to purchase fake goods; that companies will employ additional anti‐counterfeiting tactics in markets with a high level of pirates and a high degree of enforcement of its intellectual property rights; and that companies employ a standardized approach of anti‐counterfeiting tactics targeted at consumers.

This chapter provides a selective survey of the theoretical and empirical literature to date on the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPRs) and measures of innovation and international technology transfer. The chapter discusses the empirical implications of theoretical work, assesses the theoretical work based on the evidence available, and identifies some gaps in the existing literature.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the development of preventative counter-ambush marketing initiatives and rights protection strategies, providing an historical view of rights management and the International Olympic Committee’s sponsorship protection initiatives through ambush marketing’s formative years.

In examining the antecedents and implications of the Canadian Olympic Committee’s (COC) forward-thinking approach to ambush marketing protection, and to explore the development of preventative counter-ambush initiatives, an historical examination of IOC and COC policies and protocols regarding ambushing and sponsorship protection over a 30-year period was undertaken, informing the development of a proposed model of proactive commercial rights management.

The findings indicate that a progressive shift in the counter-ambush activities of major commercial rights holders may be underway: increasingly, the COC has stressed education and communication as key components of their commercial rights protection strategy, in lieu of enforcing the legal protection provided them by the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act of 2007. The resultant commercial rights management model proposed reflects this proactive approach, and illustrates the need for events and sponsorship stakeholders to Anticipate, (Re)Act and Advocate.

The study offers a contemporary perspective into counter-ambush strategies within the context of the COC’s brand protection measures and industry practice. The proactive approach to commercial rights management explored represents a significant step in ambush marketing prevention on the part of the COC.

This chapter reviews the economics literature on the development aspects of a substantially strengthened global regime of intellectual property rights (IPR). In this regime developing countries must adopt tighter standards governing patents, copyrights, and related policies, in order to protect global innovation. Some analytical literature finds that these changes could improve prospects for technology flows to poor countries, helping to integrate them into the global knowledge economy. Other authors raise deep concerns about whether these policy shifts will restrict growth through raising the costs of imitation, innovation, and acquiring international technologies. Poor countries may face permanently higher costs, raising questions about both the efficiency and equity implications. The chapter considers first the role of a balanced IPR regime in an overall economic development policy. This balance could involve widely varying protection standards at differing levels of economic development, growth, and social preferences. This situation is especially true in the world economy, where poorer countries may prefer to free ride on available international technologies. Much of the theoretical literature takes this view, suggesting that harmonized global policies could reduce innovation and growth. More recent literature takes a broader view of the ability of IPR to build global technology markets and support international information exchanges. Ultimately these are empirical questions and the available literature differs considerably in analytical approaches and conclusions. Thus, the chapter analyzes contributions from theory, empirical analysis, and case studies regarding prospective improvements or impediments to economic development arising from IPR reforms. These issues are especially important in public health and nutrition. The chapter concludes with an overview of how the globalized nature of IPR protection could affect developing countries. The essential point is that policy governing patents and copyrights needs to be embedded effectively in an overall economic development strategy.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the role of firms’ internationalization on the relationship between intellectual property right (IPR) protection and their technological innovation. While recent studies provide a negative relationship between IPR protection and technological innovation, this paper argues that firm’s internationalization weaken the negative relationship. This research is a meaningful step to clarify the theoretical conflict and empirical ambiguity of the effect of IPR protection on technological innovations.

This paper empirically analyzes the theoretical arguments with 204 US firms, which registered their patents in the United States Patent and Trademark Office and have been listed in the Compustat database between 2007 and 2010.

The paper suggests that IPR protections brings more benefit to firms with high multinationality and are more export-oriented in terms of developing technological innovation, whereas the effects of international knowledge stock is unclear in the relationship between IPR protection and technological innovation.

This study shows the effects of internationalization factors, which provide the benefits of cost efficiency and of more resource accessibility on the relationship between IPR protection regime and a firm’s technological innovation. The implication for policy makers and firm managers is that utilizing internationalization resources and capabilities is essential in developing their firms’ technological innovation under a strong IPR protection.

This paper enriches the literature of IPRs and offers the direction for future research on how a firm’s internationalization matters in its innovative activities under IPR protection.

The study aims to explore the interplay between open innovation and intellectual property. Differently from previous studies, we argue that open innovation fosters firm's patenting activity.

We use linear regression analysis to test model's hypotheses. Data are drawn from the Eurostat statistics and refer to a large sample of European firms (NACE Rev.2).

The findings confirm that open innovation fosters patenting activity in health care, also thanks to huge governments' expenditures in this market.

The study focuses solely on European firms and it adopts a traditional linear approach. So, we cannot exclude that different dynamics may occur across European borders. Future research should address this concern by focusing on multi-country comparative studies.

Open innovation is the most suitable model for health industry, because it improves both innovation performance and intellectual capital of firms.

The study tackles an existing gap of the literature by considering how the presence of large customers impacts the strength of intellectual property protection.