Innovation without Patents: Evidence from World’s Fairs

Moser, Petra

doi:10.1086/663631

Cited by 164 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Trade secrets protection against unlawful procurement can extend indefinitely and is adjudicated at the U.S. state level, as compared to patents, which are of fixed length and enforced at the federal level. 2 See Moser (2012), Castellaneta, Conti & Kacperczyk (2017), and Png (2017b) for recent exceptions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the 'Inevitable Disclosure' Doctrine

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Iwan Barankay, University of Pennsylvania (barankay@wharton.upenn.edu) and WZB Discussion papers of the WZB serve to disseminate the research results of work in progress prior to publication to encourage the exchange of ideas and academic debate. Inclusion of a paper in the discussion paper series does not constitute publication and should not limit publication in any other venue. The discussion papers published by the WZB represent the views of the respective author(s) and not of the institute as a whole. Terms of use: Documents inCopyright remains with the authors. AbstractTrade secrets and innovation: Evidence from the "inevitable disclosure" doctrine * Does heightened employer-friendly trade secrecy protection help or hinder innovation? By examining U.S. state-level legal adoption of a doctrine allowing employers to curtail inventor mobility if the employee would "inevitably disclose" trade secrets, we investigate the impact of a shifting trade secrecy regime on individual-level patenting outcomes. Using a difference-in-differences design taking un-affected U.S. inventors as the comparison group, we find strengthening employer-friendly trade secrecy adversely affects innovation. We then investigate why. We do not find empirical support for diminished idea recombination from suppressed inventor mobility as the operative mechanism. While shifting intellectual property protection away from patenting into trade secrecy has some explanatory power, our results are consistent with reduced individual-level incentives to signaling quality to the external labor market.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the 'Inevitable Disclosure' Doctrine

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a separate study, Lakdawalla and Philipson (2012) present data from the pharmaceutical industry showing that output often fails to rise after patent expiration, and suggesting that this result is due to reduced incentives for marketing nonpatented drugs. Both Moser (2012) and Lakdawalla and Philipson (2012) find results contrary to basic predictions from economic theory, and highlight a need for a more refined economic theory of IP protection.…”

Section: Empirical Work In Law and Economicsmentioning

confidence: 61%

Law and Economics: Empirical Dimensions

Broughman

Dau-Schmidt

2015

International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is also to ignore an extensive literature that deems Britain's patent system cumbersome and unreliable and expensive, with the result that most inventors shunned it (Dutton 1984;McLeod 1988McLeod , 2009McLeod and Nuvolari 2011;Moser 2012). …”

Section: The Identikit Entrepreneur?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Did Science Cause the Industrial Revolution?

Gráda

2016

Journal of Economic Literature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of science and technology in the First Industrial Revolution is still contested. Some scholars, focusing on the textiles sector, argue that skilled and talented artisans with no scientific training were mainly responsible for the key inventions; others, with steam power in mind, hold that the links between science and the crucial inventions of the period were fundamental. Margaret Jacob has been a leading contributor to the debate for nearly four decades. The publication of her The First Knowledge Economy offers an opportunity to review the issues. (JEL J24, L26, N13, N73, O31, O33)

show abstract

Innovation without Patents: Evidence from World’s Fairs

Cited by 164 publications

References 25 publications

Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the 'Inevitable Disclosure' Doctrine

Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the 'Inevitable Disclosure' Doctrine

Law and Economics: Empirical Dimensions

Did Science Cause the Industrial Revolution?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About