Skip to main content

Fundamentals of Intellectual Property Rights

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Patent Management

Part of the book series: Management for Professionals ((MANAGPROF))

Abstract

Innovation represents both value through creative effort and is a source of competitive advantage, and as such, has always been susceptible to the dangers of imitation. Only effective innovation protection can ensure sustainable business success, but the protection of innovation using intellectual property rights can help capture value. This assertion will serve as a guide in the following chapter on innovation protection of industrial and intellectual property; along the way, we also go into other informal and competitive ways of protecting innovation, such as lead-time. This chapter covers all types of protection such as inventions, trademarks, designs, and more. In doing so, we show why various factors such as globalization and ever-shortening innovation cycles in the recent past have immensely intensified the need to manage innovation. As Joseph Schumpeter, considered the father of innovation economics, showed, patents foster innovation and influence its subsequent commercial success. Thus, the importance of commercial protection rights should not be underestimated, and we begin by outlining how they create value for innovators. Strategic management of patents is hence a fundamental and integral part of technology and innovation management.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    In addition, a voluntary registration of the protected work with the United States Copyright Office—The Library of Congress—makes sense. This makes the work public on the one hand and the Office issues a certificate of registration on the other. In the context of the judicial enforcement of copyrights, registration is even a prerequisite for being able to assert a flat-rate claim for damages provided for by law and for being able to demand reimbursement of lawyer’s fees in the event of success.

References

  • Amara, N., Landry, R., & Traoré, N. (2008). Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge intensive business services. Research Policy, 37(9), 1530–1547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2001). Value creation in e-business. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, A., & Ceccagnoli, M. (2006). Patent protection, complementary assets, and firms incentives for technology licensing. Management Science, 52(2), 293–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader, M. A. (2008). Managing intellectual property in the financial services industry sector: Learning from Swiss Re. Technovation, 28, 196–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader, M. A., & Stummeyer, C. (2019). The role of innovation and IP in AI-based business models. In R. Baierl, J. Behrens, & A. Brem (Eds.), Digital entrepreneurship – Interfaces between digital technologies and entrepreneurship (pp. 23–56). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Shalom, A., & Cook-Deegan, R. (2002). Patents and innovation in cancer therapeutics: Lessons from CellPro. The Milbank Quaterly, 80(4), 637–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartenbach, K., Jung, I., & Renvert, A. (2013). Apple vs. Samsung – Zu den Grenzen von Geschmacksmusterschutz und ergänzendem wettbewerbsrechtlichen Leistungsschutz. Mitteilungen der deutschen Patentanwälte, 104(1), 18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brem, A., Maier, M., & Wimschneider, C. (2016). Competitive advantage through innovation: the case of Nespresso. European Journal of Innovation Management, 19(1), 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckminster Fuller, R. (1982). Critical path. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2007). Business model innovation: It’s not just about technology anymore. Strategy and Leadership, 35(6), 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 529–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Teubal, M. (2006). Introduction to the research policy 20th anniversary special issue of the publication of ‘profiting from innovation by David J. Teece’. Research Policy, 35(8), 1091–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent or not. NBER Working Paper, No. 7552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999). Science and technology as predictors of stock performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(5), 20–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desyllas, P., & Sako, M. (2013). Profiting from business model innovation: Evidence from pay-as-you-drive auto insurance. Research Policy, 42(1), 101–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., Marengo, L., & Pasquali, C. (2006). How much should society fuel the greed of innovators? On the relations between appropriability, opportunities and rates of innovation. Research Policy, 35(8), 1110–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrat, M. (1997). Kompetenzorientierte, analysegestützte Technologiestrategieerarbeitung. Dissertation University of St. Gallen (HSG), St. Gallen, No. 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (1996). Patentinformationen für die strategische Planung von Forschung und Entwicklung. Gabler: Wiesbaden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2001). Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: Evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Research Policy, 30, 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallié, E. P., & Legros, D. (2012). French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property. Research Policy, 41(4), 780–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gans, J., Hsu, D. H., & Stern, S. (2002). When does start-up innovation spur the gale of creative destruction? RAND Journal of Economics, 33(4), 571–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., & Bader, M. A. (2017). Patentmanagement: Innovationen erfolgreich nutzen und schützen (4th ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., Frankenberger, K., & Choudury, M. (2020). The Business Model Navigator. FT Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., Schuhmacher, A., Reepmeyer, G., & von Zedtwitz, M. (2018). Leading pharmaceutical innovation – How to win the life science race (3rd ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H. (2003). Business method patents, innovation and policy. NBER Working Paper, No. 9717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry 1979–1995. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBM. (2006). The toxic terabyte: How data-dumping threatens business efficiency. IBM Global Technical Services white paper. Accessed on March 9th, 2020, https://archive.org/stream/TheToxicTerabyte/The%20Toxic%20Terabyte_djvu.txt

  • IPI. (2020). Envisioned. Created. Protected. A concise guide to trade marks, patents and co.(10th ed). Bern: IPI Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., & Lerner, J. (2004). Innovation and its discontents: How our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landes, W. M., & Posner, R. A. (2003). The economic structure of intellectual property law. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lepak, D. P., Smith, K. G., & Taylor, M. S. (2007). Value creation and value capture: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 180–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. RAND Journal of Economics, 25(2), 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGahan, A. M., & Silverman, B. S. (2006). Profiting from technological innovation by others: The effect of competitor patenting on firm value. Research Policy, 35(8), 1222–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2003). Genetic inventions, IPRs and licensing practices: Evidence and policies. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2004). Patents and innovation: Trends and policy challenges. Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. (2006). Profiting from innovation and the intellectual property revolution. Research Policy, 35(8), 1122–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivette, K. G., & Kline, D. (2000). Discovering new value in intellectual property. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 54–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmacher, A., Gassmann, O., McCracken, N., & Hinder, M. (2018). Open innovation and external sources of innovation. An opportunity to fuel the R&D pipeline and enhance decision making? Journal of Translational Medicine, 119(16), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (8th ed.). Berlin: Dunker und Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2001). Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management Science, 47(2), 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, J., Guellec, D., & Martinez, C. (2003) Business patenting and licensing: Results from the OECD/BIAC survey. In: Proceedings of the OECD Conference on IPR, Innovation and Economic Performance, 28–29 August 2003. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squicciarini, M., Dernis, H., & Criscuolo, C. (2013). Measuring patent quality. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2006). Reflections on “profiting from innovation”. Research Policy, 35(8), 1131–1146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M. (2017). The cost of patent protection: Renewal propensity. World Patent Information, Vol. 49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winterhalter, S., Zeschky, M., Neumann, L., & Gassmann, O. (2017). Business models for frugal innovation in emerging markets: The case of the medical device and laboratory equipment industry. Technovation 66–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • WIPO. (2020). What is a trade secret? Geneva: WIPO. https://www.wipo.int/sme/en/ip_business/trade_secrets/trade_secrets.htm. Accessed on January 8th, 2020.

  • Zeschky, M., Widenmayer, B., & Gassmann, O. (2014). Organizing for reverse innovation in Western MNCs: The role of frugal product innovation capabilities. International Journal of Technology Management, 64(2–4), 255–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: Recent developments and future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1019–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gassmann, O., Bader, M.A., Thompson, M.J. (2021). Fundamentals of Intellectual Property Rights. In: Patent Management. Management for Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59009-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics