請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/20414
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 黃慕萱(Mu-hsuan Huang) | |
dc.contributor.author | Huei-Ru Dong | en |
dc.contributor.author | 董蕙茹 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T02:47:56Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2017-08-24 | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2017-08-18 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 吳紅、付秀穎、董坤(2013)。專利維持時間影響因素實證分析—以燃料電池專利文獻為例。圖書情報工作,57(24),112-116。
朱雪忠、喬勇忠、萬小麗(2009)。基於維持時間的發明專利品質實證研究—以中國國家智慧財產權局1994年授權的發明專利為例。管理世界,2009(1),174-175。 楊志海、陳忠榮(2002)。專利保護與專利價值-專利維護費的實證分析(國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,NSC 90-2415-H-156-003)。新北市:真理大學經濟系。 陳達仁、黃慕萱(2009)。專利資訊檢索、分析與策略(初版)。臺北市:華泰。 Abrams, D. S. (2009). Did TRIPS Spur Innovation? An Analysis of Patent Duration and Incentives to Innovate. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 157(6), 1613–1647. Albert, M. B., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research Policy, 20(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90055-U Alcácer, J., Gittelman, M., & Sampat, B. (2009). Applicant and examiner citations in U.S. patents: An overview and analysis. Research Policy, 38(2), 415–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.001 Allen, J., & Oppenheim, C. (1979). The overlap of U.S. and Canadian patent literature with journal literature literature with journal literature. World Patent Information, 1(2), 77–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0172-2190(79)90038-3 Anderson, R. C., Duru, A., & Reeb, D. M. (2012). Investment policy in family controlled firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 36(6), 1744–1758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.01.018 Andries, P., & Faems, D. (2013). Patenting Activities and Firm Performance: Does Firm Size Matter? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(6), 1089–1098. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12047 Antonelli, C., & Colombelli, A. (2011). The generation and exploitation of technological change: market value and total factor productivity. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(4), 353–382. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9198-z Azagra-Caro, J. M., Mattsson, P., & Perruchas, F. (2011). Smoothing the lies: The distinctive effects of patent characteristics on examiner and applicant citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1727–1740. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21574 Barney, J. A. (2002). Study of Patent Mortality Rates: Using Statistical Survival Analysis to Rate and Value Patent Assets. AIPLA Quarterly Journal, 30(3), 317–352. Baron, J., & Delcamp, H. (2012). The private and social value of patents in discrete and cumulative innovation. Scientometrics, 90(2), 581–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0532-5 Bartram, S. M., Brown, G., & Stulz, R. M. (2012). Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile? The Journal of Finance, 67(4), 1329–1370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2012.01749.x Belenzon, S. (2012). Cumulative Innovation and Market Value: Evidence from Patent Citations. The Economic Journal, 122(559), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02470.x Bessen, J. (2008). The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics. Research Policy, 37(5), 932–945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.005 Bessen, J. (2009). Estimates of patent rents from firm market value. Research Policy, 38(10), 1604–1616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.014 Bhattacharya, S., Kretschmer, H., & Meyer, M. (2003). Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology. Scientometrics, 58(2), 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026244828759 Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2002). Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance. The Economic Journal, 112(478), C97–C116. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00022 Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & van Reenen, J. (1999). Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms. Review of Economic Studies, 66(3), 529–554. https://doi.org/http://restud.oxfordjournals.org/content/by/year Boldrin, M., & Levine, D. K. (2008). Against intellectual monopoly. New York: Cambridge University Press. Bosworth, D., & Jobome, G. (2003). The rate of depreciation of technological knowledge: evidence from patent renewal data. Economic Issues, 8(1), 59–82. Brown, W. H. (1995). Trends in patent renewals at the United States patent and trademark office. World Patent Information, 17(4), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/0172-2190(95)00043-7 Budish, E. B., Roin, B. N., & Williams, H. (2013). Do Fixed Patent Terms Distort Innovation?: Evidence from Cancer Clinical Trials (Booth Working Paper No. 13–79). Chicago: The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business. Caballero, R. J., & Jaffe, A. B. (1993). How High Are the Giants’ Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 8, 15–74. https://doi.org/10.1086/654207 Cáceres, R., Guzmán, J., & Rekowski, M. (2011). Firms as source of variety in innovation: influence of size and sector. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(3), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0198-8 Casson, M. (1991). Global research strategy and international competitiveness. Oxford, UK; Cambridge, Mass., USA: B. Blackwell. Chan, L. K. C., Lakonishok, J., & Sougiannis, T. (1999). The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures (Working Paper No. 7223). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7223 Chemmanur, T. J., Loutskina, E., & Tian, X. (2014). Corporate Venture Capital, Value Creation, and Innovation. Review of Financial Studies, 27(8), 2434–2473. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhu033 Chen, D.-Z., Lin, C.-P., Huang, M.-H., & Huang, C.-Y. (2010). Constructing a new patent bibliometric performance measure by using modified citation rate analyses with dynamic backward citation windows. Scientometrics, 82(1), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0044-8 Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not) (Working Paper No. 7552). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7552 Collins, P., & Wyatt, S. (1988). Citations in patents to the basic research literature. Research Policy, 17(2), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(88)90022-4 Cornelli, F., & Schankerman, M. (1999). Patent Renewals and R&D Incentives. The RAND Journal of Economics, 30(2), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.2307/2556077 Criscuolo, P. (2006). The “home advantage” effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO. Scientometrics, 66(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0003-6 Criscuolo, P., & Verspagen, B. (2008). Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Research Policy, 37(10), 1892–1908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.011 Danguy, J., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2011). Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Community Patent. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2(2), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.2202/2152-2812.1030 de Rassenfosse, G. (2012). Are patent fees effective at weeding out low quality patents. In USPTO-Kauffman Foundation Conference on Patents, Entrepreneurship, and Innovation (pp. 3–4). Retrieved from http://www.webmeets.com/files/papers/earie/2012/439/fees_and_quality_20120821.pdf de Rassenfosse, G., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2013). The Role of Fees in Patent Systems: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(4), 696–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2011.00712.x Deng, Y. (2007). Private value of European patents. European Economic Review, 51(7), 1785–1812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2006.09.005 Deng, Y. (2011). A dynamic stochastic analysis of international patent application and renewal processes. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 29(6), 766–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2011.04.004 Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999). Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(3), 20–32. Dernburg, T., & Gharrity, N. (1961). A Statistical Analysis of Patent Renewal Data for Three Countries. Patent, Trademark and Copyright Journal of Research and Education, 5(4), 340–368. Dernis, H., & Khan, M. (2004). Triadic Patent Families Methodology (OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/workingpaper/443844125004 Du, J., Leten, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Lopez-Vega, H. (2014). When Research Meets Development: Antecedents and Implications of Transfer Speed. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6), 1181–1198. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12249 Duffy, J. F. (2004). Rethinking the prospect theory of patents. University of Chicago Law Review, 71(2), 439–510. Duguet, E., & Iung, N. (1997). R&D Investment, Patent Life and Patent Value (Working Paper No. G9705). France: Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques. Retrieved from http://www.insee.fr/fr/publications-et-services/docs_doc_travail/g9705.pdf Duguet, E., & Kabla, I. (2000). Appropriation Strategy and the Motivations to use the Patent System: an Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing. In The Economics and Econometrics of Innovation (pp. 267–305). Springer US. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4757-3194-1_11 Eisenschitz, T. S., Lazard, A. M., & Willey, C. J. (1986). Patent groups and their relationship with journal literature. Journal of Information Science, 12(1–2), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/016555158601200109 Eisenschitz, T. S., McKie, L. J., & Warne, K. (1989). Communication of information in U.S. biotechnology patents. World Patent Information, 11(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0172-2190(89)90025-2 EPO. (1995). Utilisation of patent protection in Europe. World Patent Information, 17(2), 100–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0172-2190(95)90160-4 Frietsch, R., Schmoch, U., Van Looy, B., Walsh, J. P., Devroede, R., Du Plessis, M., … others. (2010). The value and indicator function of patents (Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem No. 15–2010). Berlin: Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem. Retrieved from https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/156544/1/StuDIS_2010-15.pdf Gabolde, J. (1997). Second European Report on S&T Indicators. Brussels: European Commission. Gambardella, A. (2013). The economic value of patented inventions: Thoughts and some open questions. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 31(5), 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2013.02.007 Garfield, E. (1983). Citation indexing, its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. Philadelphia: ISI Press. Gilbert, R., & Shapiro, C. (1990). Optimal Patent Length and Breadth. The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 106–112. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555497 Goldberg, P. K. (2010). Alfred Marshall Lecture Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Developing Countries: The Case of Pharmaceuticals. Journal of the European Economic Association, 8(2–3), 326–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2010.tb00506.x Grabowski, H. (2002). Patents, Innovation and Access to New Pharmaceuticals. Journal of International Economic Law, 5(4), 849–860. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/5.4.849 Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661–1707. Griliches, Z. (1998). Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. In R&D and productivity: the econometric evidence (pp. 287–343). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8351.pdf Griliches, Z., Pakes, A., & Hall, B. H. (1986). The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity (Working Paper No. 2083). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w2083 Grönqvist, C. (2009a). Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents (Scientific monographs No. E:41). Helsinki, Finland: Henrik. Retrieved from http://www.suomenpankki.fi/en/julkaisut/tutkimukset/erillisjulkaisut/Documents/E_41.pdf Grönqvist, C. (2009b). The private value of patents by patent characteristics: evidence from Finland. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9067-6 Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe, B. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics Letters, 69(1), 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(00)00265-2 Hall, B. H. (1999). Innovation and Market Value (Working Paper No. 6984). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w6984 Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools (Working Paper No. 8498). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w8498 Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market Value and Patent Citations. The RAND Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593752 Hall, B. H., Thoma, G., & Torrisi, S. (2007). The Market Value of Patents and R&d: Evidence from European Firms. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2007(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2007.26530853 Han, E. J., & Sohn, S. Y. (2014). Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(5), 821–839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9367-6 Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., Reichl, B., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2009). Patent validation at the country level—The role of fees and translation costs. Research Policy, 38(9), 1423–1437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.014 Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2009). Languages, Fees and the International Scope of Patenting (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1372561). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1372561 Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (1999). Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(3), 511–515. Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00124-5 Hirabayashi, M. J., & Myers, J. S. (1988). U.S. patent expirations due to the nonpayment of the three and a half year maintenance fee. World Patent Information, 10(3), 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0172-2190(88)90006-3 Horowitz, A. W., & Lai, E. L.-C. (1996). Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation. International Economic Review, 37(4), 785–801. https://doi.org/10.2307/2527311 Huang, M.-H., Dong, H.-R., & Chen, D.-Z. (2012). Globalization of collaborative creativity through cross-border patent activities. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 226–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.10.003 Huang, M.-H., Dong, H.-R., & Chen, D.-Z. (2013). The unbalanced performance and regional differences in scientific and technological collaboration in the field of solar cells. Scientometrics, 94(1), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0755-0 Huang, M.-H., Lin, C.-S., & Chen, D.-Z. (2011). Counting methods, country rank changes, and counting inflation in the assessment of national research productivity and impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2427–2436. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21625 Huang, M.-H., Yang, H.-W., & Chen, D.-Z. (2015). Increasing science and technology linkage in fuel cells: A cross citation analysis of papers and patents. Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 237–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.02.001 Iwaisako, T., & Futagami, K. (2013). Patent protection, capital accumulation, and economic growth. Economic Theory, 52(2), 631–668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-011-0658-y Jaffe, A. B. (1986). Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R & D: Evidence from Firms’ Patents, Profits, and Market Value. The American Economic Review, 76(5), 984–1001. Kaplow, L. (1984). The Patent-Antitrust Intersection: A Reappraisal. Harvard Law Review, 97(8), 1813–1892. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340932 Kesan, J. P. (2002). Carrots and Sticks to Create a Better Patent System (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 305999). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=305999 Kim, J. (2015). Patent Portfolio Management of Sequential Inventions: Evidence from US Patent Renewal Data. Review of Industrial Organization, 47(2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-015-9468-x Klemperer, P. (1990). How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be? The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(1), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555498 Lai, K.-K., & Wu, S.-J. (2005). Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system. Information Processing & Management, 41(2), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2003.11.004 Langinier, C., & Marcoul, P. (2009). Contributory infringement rule and patents. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 70(1–2), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2008.10.012 Lanjouw, J. O. (1998). Patent protection in the shadow of infringement: Simulation estimations of patent value. The Review of Economic Studies, 65(4), 671–710. Lanjouw, J. O., Pakes, A., & Putnam, J. (1998). How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(4), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00081 Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (1999). The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators (Working Paper No. 7345). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7345 Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (2001a). Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition. The RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 129–151. https://doi.org/10.2307/2696401 Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (2001b). Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights (Working Paper No. 8656). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w8656 Lanjouw, J. O., & Schankerman, M. (2004). Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators. Economic Journal, 114(495), 441–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/%28ISSN%291468-0297/issues Lee, Y.-G. (2008). Patent licensability and life: A study of U.S. patents registered by South Korean public research institutes. Scientometrics, 75(3), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1879-5 Lee, Y.-G. (2009). What affects a patent’s value? An analysis of variables that affect technological, direct economic, and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach. Scientometrics, 79(3), 623–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2020-5 Lee, Y.-J., & Lee, J.-D. (2008). Technology strategy for enhancing the public-to-private technology transfer: evidence from the duration of patent. Applied Economics, 40(2), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840600749854 Lemley, M. A. (1994). An Empirical Study of the Twenty-Year Patent Term (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2127292). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2127292 Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: an empirical analysis. The RAND Journal of Economics, 319–333. Lerner, J. (2000). 150 Years of Patent Protection (Working Paper No. 7478). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7478 Lerner, J., Sorensen, M., & Strömberg, P. (2011). Private Equity and Long-Run Investment: The Case of Innovation. The Journal of Finance, 66(2), 445–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01639.x Li, R., Chambers, T., Ding, Y., Zhang, G., & Meng, L. (2014). Patent citation analysis: Calculating science linkage based on citing motivation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 1007–1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23054 Lin, C.-S., Huang, M.-H., & Chen, D.-Z. (2013). The influences of counting methods on university rankings based on paper count and citation count. Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.03.007 Liu, K., Arthurs, J., Cullen, J., & Alexander, R. (2008). Internal sequential innovations: How does interrelatedness affect patent renewal? Research Policy, 37(5), 946–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.03.005 Marco, A. C. (2005). The option value of patent litigation: Theory and evidence. Review of Financial Economics, 14(3–4), 323–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rfe.2004.09.003 Maurseth, P. B. (2005). Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14(5), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/1043859042000307338 Merges, R. P., & Duffy, J. F. (2007). Patent law and policy: cases and materials (4th ed). Newark, NJ: LexisNexis. Meyer, M. S., & Tang, P. (2007). Exploring the “value” of academic patents: IP management practices in UK universities and their implications for Third-Stream indicators. Scientometrics, 70(2), 415–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0210-9 Michel, J., & Bettels, B. (2001). Patent citation analysis.A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports. Scientometrics, 51(1), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010577030871 Narin, F. (1994). Patent bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 30(1), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017219 Narin, F., & Olivastro, D. (1993). Patent citation cycles. Library Trends, 41(4), 700–709. Neuhäusler, P., & Frietsch, R. (2013). Patent families as macro level patent value indicators: applying weights to account for market differences. Scientometrics, 96(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0870-y Nikzad, R. (2011). Survival Analysis of Patents in Canada. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 14(5), 368–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2011.00425.x Nordhaus, W. D. (1969). Invention, growth, and welfare: A theoretical treatment of technological change. MIT Press Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from http://orton.catie.ac.cr/cgi-bin/wxis.exe/?IsisScript=BAC.xis&method=post&formato=2&cantidad=1&expresion=mfn=033981 Nudelman, A. E., & Landers, C. E. (1972). The failure of 100 divided by 3 to equal 33 1/3. The American Sociologist, 7(9), 9. O’Donoghue, T., Scotchmer, S., & Thisse, J.-F. (1998). Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 7(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1430-9134.1998.00001.x OECD. (1996). Innovation, patents and technological strategies. Paris: OECD. Pakes, A. (1986). Patents as Options: Some Estimates of the Value of Holding European Patent Stocks (Working Paper No. 1340). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w1340 Pakes, A., & Schankerman, M. (1979). The Rate of Obsolescence Of Knowledge, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources (Working Paper No. 346). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w0346 Pakes, A., Simpson, M., Judd, K., & Mansfield, E. (1989). Patent renewal data. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics, 1989, 331–410. Park, G., & Park, Y. (2006). On the measurement of patent stock as knowledge indicators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(7), 793–812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2005.09.006 Patel, P., & Vega, M. (1999). Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages1. Research Policy, 28(2–3), 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00117-6 Peeters, C., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2006). Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 16(1–2), 109–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-005-0010-4 Pravdić, N., & Oluić-Vuković, V. (1986). Dual approach to multiple authorship in the study of collaboration/scientific output relationship. Scientometrics, 10(5), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016774 Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349. Putnam, J. (1996). The value of international patent protection. Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, Yale University. Reitzig, M. (2003). What determines patent value?: Insights from the semiconductor industry. Research Policy, 32(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00193-7 Reitzig, M. (2004). Improving patent valuations for management purposes—validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales. Research Policy, 33(6–7), 939–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.02.004 Roin, B. N. (2014). The case for tailoring patent awards based on the time-to-market of inventions. UCLA Law Review, 61(3), 672–759. Schankerman, M. (1998). How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field. RAND Journal of Economics, 29(1), 77–107. Schankerman, M., & Pakes, A. (1986). Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period. Economic Journal, 96(384), 1052–1076. https://doi.org/10.1111/%28ISSN%291468-0297/issues Scherer, F. M. (1972). Nordhaus’ Theory of Optimal Patent Life: A Geometric Reinterpretation. The American Economic Review, 62(3), 422–427. Schubert, T. (2011). Assessing the value of patent portfolios: an international country comparison. Scientometrics, 88(3), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0454-2 Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Thought. Scotchmer, S. (1999). On the Optimality of the Patent Renewal System. The RAND Journal of Economics, 30(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.2307/2556076 Serrano, C. J. (2010). The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents. The RAND Journal of Economics, 41(4), 686–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00117.x Stock, M., & Stock, W. G. (2006). Intellectual property information: A comparative analysis of main information providers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(13), 1794–1803. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20498 Sukhatme, N. U., & Cramer, J. N. L. (2014). Who Cares About Patent Term? Cross-Industry Differences in Term Sensitivity (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2293245). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2293245 Sullivan, R. J. (1994). Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in Great Britain and Ireland, 1852- 1876. Economica, 61(241), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555048 Sung, H.-Y., Wang, C.-C., Chen, D.-Z., & Huang, M.-H. (2014). A comparative study of patent counts by the inventor country and the assignee country. Scientometrics, 100(2), 577–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1192-4 Svensson, R. (2013). Publicly-funded R&D programs and survival of patents. Applied Economics, 45(10), 1343–1358. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2011.617700 Thomas, P. (1999). The Effect of Technological Impact upon Patent Renewal Decisions. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11(2), 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/095373299107492 Thompson, P. (2006). Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Inventor- and Examiner-added Citations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2), 383–388. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.88.2.383 Tsang, S.-S., Chang, F.-C., & Wang, W.-C. (2015). A Survival Analysis on Fuel Cell Technology Patent Maintenance and Values Exploration between 1976 and 2001. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2015, e387491. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/387491, 10.1155/2015/387491 van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., & van Zeebroeck, N. (2008). A brief history of space and time: The scope-year index as a patent value indicator based on families and renewals. Scientometrics, 75(2), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1864-z van Zeebroeck, N. (2007). Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe (CEB Working Paper No. 07/028). Brussels, Belgium: ULB–Universite Libre de Bruxelles. Retrieved from http://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/53936/1/RePEc_sol_wpaper_07-028.pdf van Zeebroeck, N. (2011a). Long Live Patents: the Increasing Life Expectancy of Patent Applications and its Determinants. Review of Economics and Institutions, 2(3), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.5202/rei.v2i3.41 van Zeebroeck, N. (2011b). The puzzle of patent value indicators. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(1), 33–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590903038256 Wagner, R. P. (2004). On Software Regulation (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 57). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=582422 Wang, S.-J. (2007). Factors to evaluate a patent in addition to citations. Scientometrics, 71(3), 509–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1698-8 Zhang, G., Lv, X., & Zhou, J. (2014). Private value of patent right and patent infringement: An empirical study based on patent renewal data of China. China Economic Review, 28, 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2013.11.004 Zheng, J., Zhao, Z., Zhang, X., Huang, M., & Chen, D. (2014). Influences of counting methods on country rankings: a perspective from patent analysis. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2087–2102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1139-9 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/20414 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本研究為專利計量方法論的探討,專利資料庫中有許多價值相對沒那麼高的專利,導致專利計量的分析結果與實際的現象不符,本研究欲透過有效專利作為價值相對較高專利的代表,探討有效專利對專利計量分析的影響。本研究提出三個假設,分別是假設一:有效專利與所有專利的的計量分析結果有差異;假設二:有效專利與失效專利的計量結果有差異;以及假設三:不同有效期長度專利的計量分析結果有差異。並且在各種常見的專利計量分析層級逐一驗證,包含USPTO整體、技術領域、國家、專利權人屬性、以及專利權人層級等;最後透過三個面向的代表性指標,包含平均被引次數、科學連結、技術廣度三個專利計量指標,逐一驗證有效專利在各種分析層級中的效果。
研究結果發現使用平均被引次數與科學連結指標時,在所有的分析層級中,三個假設幾乎都是成立的,尤其是USPTO整體分析層級完全成立,至於技術廣度指標在三個假設的驗證時,分析層級高的時候也是幾乎都是成立的,但是在國家及專利權人分析層級時,驗證的效力降低許多,這可能是因為國家或專利權人發展的技術大致上是固定的,較不會因為有效專利或失效專利而有不同。 但是在使用平均被引次數指標驗證有效專利與失效專利是否有差異時,雖然驗證的結果有差異,但大多是失效專利的值高於有效專利的值,不同於科學連結或技術廣度是有效專利的值相對較高,這是因為平均被引次數是採用不限引用區間的被引次數計算方式,失效專利大多數為較早核准的專利,能被引用的時間較長,平均被引次數相對較高。故在採計有效專利時,建議使用固定引用區間的方式採計專利平均被引次數,較能減少因引用區間長度差異造成的偏差問題。 本研究也發現專利的數量、有效專利比例及專利品質之間,並沒有很明顯的關係,並非專利數量多時,有效專利的比例也較高,也不代表專利的品質較高。而且專利有可能被維護的時間長度,也與其技術週期時間(TCT)沒有明顯的關係,雖然專利有效期長度的趨勢與專利被引半衰期時間趨勢接近,有效期越長的專利被引半衰期也越高,但仍與實際的專利有效期長度不同。 根據本研究驗證的結果,建議在專利計量分析時,應採用有效專利計量分析,有效專利計量分析的是依然有法律效力的專利,較為能夠真實的呈現既有專利的特徵,符合真實現況的專利計量結果。而且在有效專利計量分析時,應該使用固定引用區間計算專利的被引次數,避免受到引用區間長度不一造成的偏差問題。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T02:47:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-106-D99126002-1.pdf: 4368065 bytes, checksum: 54b6253fbacd048f8e3d2eff3f1d64cd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 問題陳述 1 第二節 研究架構與研究假設 7 第三節 研究範圍與限制 10 第四節 名詞解釋 12 第貳章 文獻回顧 15 第一節 書目計量及專利計量之本質差異 15 第二節 專利維護制度 22 第三節 專利有效期的研究 28 第四節 專利有效期與專利價值的關係 47 第參章 研究方法與實施 61 第一節 研究方法與設計 61 第二節 研究對象 69 第三節 研究步驟與流程 70 第四節 資料處理及分析 72 第肆章 研究結果 75 第一節 有效專利與所有專利計量結果差異 75 第二節 有效專利與失效專利之計量分析結果差異 111 第三節 專利有效期長度之專利品質差異 135 第四節 綜合討論 158 第伍章 結論與建議 171 第一節 建議 176 第二節 研究貢獻 178 第三節 進一步研究之建議 180 參考書目 183 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 有效專利對專利計量分析之影響研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Influence of Valid and In-force Patents in Patentometrics | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 105-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 唐牧群,陳達仁,吳明德,林奇秀 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 有效專利,專利計量分析,專利有效期,專利維護,平均被引次數,科學連結,技術廣度, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Valid Patent,in-force Patent,patentometrics,patent duration,average citation count,science linkage,patent breadth, | en |
dc.relation.page | 195 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201703959 | |
dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2017-08-18 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 圖書資訊學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 圖書資訊學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-106-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 4.27 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。