A brief history of space and time: The scope-year index as a patent value indicator based on families and renewals

Potterie, Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la; Zeebroeck, Nicolas van

doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1864-z

Cited by 74 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, van Pottelsberghe and van Zeebreock (2008) show that whereas the mean number of EPC member states increased between 1980 and 2005, the number of validated states remained rather stable. Consequently, using information on designated states might lead to biased results with respect to patent flows, especially in the most recent past.…”

Section: The Gravity Modelmentioning

confidence: 93%

Patent validation at the country level—The role of fees and translation costs

Harhoff

Hoisl²,

Reichl

et al. 2009

Research Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:One feature of the European patent system that is heavily criticized nowadays is related to its complex fragmentation and the induced cost burden for applicants. Once a patent is granted by the EPO, the assignee must validate (and often translate) it and pay the renewal fees to keep it in force in each country in which the applicant seeks protection. The objective of this paper is to assess to what extent validation and renewal fees as well as translation costs affect the validation behavior of applicants. We rely on a gravity model that aims at explaining patent flows between inventor and target countries within the European patent system. The results show that the size of countries, their wealth and the distance between their capital cities are significant determinants of patent flows. Validation fees and renewal fees further affect the validation behavior of applicants. Translation costs seem to have an impact as well. The important role played by fees suggests that the implementation of cost-reducing policy interventions like the London Protocol would induce a significant increase in the number of patents validated in each European country. JEL Classification:O30, O31, O38, O57Keywords: patent fees, validation fees, renewal fees, gravity model AcknowledgementThe authors thank Nicolas van Zeebroeck for developing the methodology to identify validations and for constructing the dataset (the methodology described in van Pottelsberghe and van Zeebroeck (2008) and in van Zeebroeck (2007)). The authors are grateful to the EPO for providing access to patent renewal data.

show abstract

Section: The Gravity Modelmentioning

confidence: 93%

Patent validation at the country level—The role of fees and translation costs

Harhoff

Hoisl²,

Reichl

et al. 2009

Research Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Generally, patent values are inferred from characteristics of either the patent itself or the patent owner. These variables are typically only loosely correlated with each other and are thus sometimes aggregated into composite patent quality indexes (Lanjouw and Schankerman 2004; van Pottelsberghe and van Zeebroeck 2008; van Zeebroeck 2011). In the remainder of this section we review the most frequently used indicators of patent value in greater detail and use them to assess the quality of our proposed new indicators in sector 5.…”

Section: Patents As Innovation Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This approach has been used by many scholars (e.g. Pakes and Schankerman 1984; Shankerman and Pakes 1986; van Pottelsberghe and van Zeebroeck 2008; Hegde and Sampat 2009). However, renewal data raises several issues.…”

Section: Patents As Innovation Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More specifically, patent families include all the patents claiming the same priority (or set of priorities), and are usually thought of as the set of patents protecting the same invention in different countries (for a very complete review of the definition of patent families, see Martinez 2010). Putnam (1996), Harhoff et al (2003) and van Pottelsberghe and van Zeebroeck (2008) find a positive correlation between patent value and the number of countries in which patent protection is sought for the same invention. Patent families are also at the origin of simpler indicators.…”

Section: Patents As Innovation Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the characteristics of international patent families, including their domestic component. We exploit a relatively under-studied feature of patent families, namely the number of patents covering the same invention within a given jurisdiction. Using this information, we highlight common patterns in the structure of international patent families, which reflect both the patenting strategies of innovators and the peculiarities of the different patent systems. While the literature has extensively used family size, i.e. the number of countries in which a given invention is protected, as a measure of patent value, our results suggest that the number of patent filings in the priority country within a patent family as well as the timespan between the first and last filings within a family are other insightful indicators of the value of patented innovations.

show abstract

“…Hence we include both family size and survival term in the composite value. We utilise the scope year index as proposed by Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie[37] to capture the geographical scope and term survival of the patent. This indicator is expressed as:…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge accumulation and value of inventions

Chandra

Dong

2015

2015 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A challenging task in technology management is the early identification of valuable inventions. Techniques that attempt to do so using patent indicators find that the predictions based on one indicator often do not agree with the predictions made with other indicators. Focusing on technological value, we propose a new metric based upon the concept of knowledge accumulation. Knowledge accumulation accounts for the background knowledge preceding the invention. Prior knowledge underlying an invention should be indicative of technical experience in the sector, which has led to solutions to various technological problems that grow the body of knowledge relevant to the invention. Hence knowledge accumulation may be a suitable indicator of the maturity of the knowledge that contributes to the specific invention. Using a composite patent value and multiple generation citation networks, we compare knowle�ge accumulation in patents for inventions in the energy harvestmg sector over a tOO-year observation period. The results indicate that there is a statistically significant correlation between . the composite patent value and knowledge accumulatIOn. As the analysis considered both patent applications and granted patents, the results imply that the metric can be used to predict the technological value of technologies that have not yet been patented.

show abstract

A brief history of space and time: The scope-year index as a patent value indicator based on families and renewals

Cited by 74 publications

References 30 publications

Patent validation at the country level—The role of fees and translation costs

Patent validation at the country level—The role of fees and translation costs

International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators

Knowledge accumulation and value of inventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About