Do Trademark Lawyers Matter?

Gerhardt, Deborah R.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2246750

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, we are able to distinguish between trademarks filed with the help of trademark attorneys and pro se applicants. Trademark attorneys are not a prerequisite for pursuing a successful trademark application, but they seem to significantly increase the likelihood of success (Gerhardt and McClanahan, 2013). Their involvement may therefore be particularly relevant in cases of radical innovation, with high-risk and large investments, to ensure that the innovator earns sufficient rents from innovation.…”

Section: The Distinctiveness Of Trademark Filing Strategies For Innovmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the Trademark-Innovation Linkage: the Role of Patents and Trademark Filing Strategies.

Flikkema

Castaldi

Man

et al. 2015

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of trademark data in innovation studies is in its infancy, but the results of the first empirical studies are promising. However, since there is no one-to-one relationship between trademarks and innovation, the use of raw trademark counts has important drawbacks, particularly in firm-level studies. We contribute in two ways to further explain when individual trademarks refer to innovation. First, we discuss how trademarks data are complementary to information on patenting. Secondly, we investigate how trademark filing strategy provide clues on the trademark-innovation linkage, especially for unpatented innovations. We empirically test our hypotheses with survey data of new trademark applicants at the Benelux and European trademarks offices. We find that trademark applications combined with patent application more frequently refer to innovation, also radical one. Also, trademarks filed for brand creation or extension purposes more frequently refer to both patented and unpatented innovations as opposed to trademarks filed for other branding purposes.Jelcodes:O34,O3 ABSTRACTThe use of trademark data in innovation studies is in its infancy, but the results of the first empirical studies are promising. However, since there is no one-to-one relationship between trademarks and innovation, the use of raw trademark counts has important drawbacks, particularly in firm-level studies. We contribute in two ways to further explain when individual trademarks refer to innovation. First, we discuss how trademarks data are complementary to information on patenting. Secondly, we investigate how trademark filing strategy provide clues on the trademark-innovation linkage, especially for unpatented innovations. We empirically test our hypotheses with survey data of new trademark applicants at the Benelux and European trademarks offices. We find that trademark applications combined with patent application more frequently refer to innovation, also radical one. Also, trademarks filed for brand creation or extension purposes more frequently refer to both patented and unpatented innovations as opposed to trademarks filed for other branding purposes.

show abstract

Section: The Distinctiveness Of Trademark Filing Strategies For Innovmentioning

confidence: 99%