Veranstaltungen

Das Florentiner Seminar zu standardessentiellen Patenten (SEPs) zielt darauf ab, eine eingehende Diskussion von etwa 14-16 ausgewählten akademischen Beiträgen anzuregen, die sich mit der Lizenzierung und den Rechtsstreitigkeiten im Zusammenhang mit standardessentiellen Patenten befassen. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf den gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen der Forschungsergebnisse.

Call for Papers

Bitte reichen Sie erweiterte Kurzfassungen oder vollständige Beiträge bis zum 31. Mai 2022 ein.

Die Annahmebestätigungen werden bis Mitte Juni 2022 verschickt.

Die endgültigen Fassungen der ausgewählten Beiträge sind bis zum 18. September 2022 einzureichen.

Weitere Informationen: Webseite der EUI

Kontakt: Shraddha Kulhari

Different kinds of literature have suggested inconsistent answers to motivations behind a firm’s publications strategy, which, unlike patents, does not afford property rights but rather increases the chances of expropriation. A key unanswered question in the literature is: do firms use publications as an instrument to recruit scientists?  Drawing on the innovation literature, I argue that when a labor market shortage affords scientists higher bargaining power, firms tend to disclose more internal R&D via publications. To test this hypothesis, I use a novel dataset of 200 million job posts and 1.7 million firm-level publications. For identification strategy, I exploit the unanticipated rise of deep learning in AI, which resulted in a shortage of AI talents, and thus, increased scientists’ bargaining power. I demonstrate how human capital bargaining power increases firm-level R&D disclosure. This relationship is particularly salient when firms need highly trained scientists (e.g., PhD holders). Further, I document that AI job posts increase the number of AI publications, but only in the same fields of increased demands. Finally, using a novel methodology, I document that labor shortage did not increase the number of patent-paper pairs or simultaneous disclosure of the same research projects in both patents and papers.

Ansprechpartner: Michael E. Rose

Gemeinsam mit der TUM, TUM Main Campus, Seminarraum 0505.2544 (Eingang Luisenstraße/Theresienstraße, 2. OG)

Knowledge spillovers drive a wedge between private and social returns to R&D. Efficient innovation policy assigns subsidies to fields where spillovers are relatively important. We develop new measures for the private and spillover value of patented innovations and embed these in a structural microeconomic model to estimate field-specific marginal returns to R&D support. We find that expected returns to subsidy vary strongly by field and country, suggesting that targeted innovation policy has large potential to increase welfare. Because spillovers cross country borders unevenly, supranational coordination of innovation policy offers large potential efficiency gains, especially for smaller countries.

Kontakt: Fabian Gaessler

Intellectual Property as Loan Collateral

Presenter: David Heller (Max Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb)

Discussant: Annabelle Haché Harter (TUM)

Technology Governance as Selection Criterion: The Case of Smart Cities

Presenter: Lucia Baur (TUM)

Discussant: Safia Bouacha (ISTO)

Using novel and large-scale data, we reassess two claims on the effect of a connection to the editorial board of an economics journal and propose a new mechanism. Rather than editors helping departmental colleagues, the connection is particularly beneficial for the joining board members themselves; the impact on departmental colleagues who are not coauthors of the editor is comparatively small. Rather than a marked increase in quality thanks to connections, we find no such increase, if any, there is evidence of favouritism among journals with little editorial board rotation.

Ansprechpartner: Michael E. Rose

Da der Zugang zum Internet für digitale Geschäftsmodelle und Anwendungen unerlässlich ist, ist eine solide Regulierung des Internets von entscheidender Bedeutung für die Förderung der digitalen Innovation und die volle Nutzung der gesellschaftlichen Vorteile der Digitalisierung. Die Regulierung des Internets muss der dynamischen Bewertung von Kommunikationstechnologien, Geschäftsmodellen und Märkten Rechnung tragen. Vor diesem Hintergrund organisiert das Institut einen Workshop, der verschiedene Interessengruppen und Experten zusammenbringt, um ein besseres Verständnis des Internets im Hinblick auf die künftige Regulierung zu entwickeln.

Recent research and popular debate suggest that there can be a positive relationship between diversity, or differences in team member characteristics, and performance in novel problem-solving. In this study, we take steps to disambiguate the causal effects of knowledge diversity versus demographic diversity (gender, race, age) on innovation performance. We report on a field experiment in which 834 adults engaged in an inherently multi-disciplinary product development problem. Team composition was randomly assigned, as was the degree to which teams were primed to engage in a collaborative orientation and work style. We find that performance effects of knowledge and demographic diversity are—to a striking degree—statistically separate, independent, and qualitatively distinct. Consistent with prior literature, the results indicate largely distinct implications of diversity on knowledge integration versus group problem-solving processes. Apart from this main goal of disambiguating diversity effects most broadly, the study contributes a series of results on causal effects of knowledge, gender, race, and age diversity in a field experimental context.

Ansprechpartnerin: Svenja Friess

The Digital Services Act (DSA) sets out numerous “due diligence” obligations for intermediaries concerning any type of illegal information. Copyright infringing content arguably is illegal content under the DSA, and accounts empirically for most take-down decisions by intermediaries. New rules on notice-and-action (Art. 14), statement of reasons (Art. 15), trusted flaggers (Art. 19), and measures and protection against misuse (Art. 20) add a level of specificity not found in the e-Commerce Directive (ECD), nor in the lex specialis of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (Art. 17, CDSM). The UK chose not to implement the CDSM Directive, nor is the infringement of intellectual property rights a relevant offence that triggers new “duty of care” obligations under the Online Safety Bill published on 17 March 2022 (section 52(8)). However, the Bill also abandons the (Art. 15, ECD) prohibition of “general monitoring”, endorsing “proactive technology” and instituting a new regulatory system based on “codes of practice”. Codes of practice are essentially terms of service negotiated between “high-risk, high-reach” platforms and the regulator Ofcom, with significant executive powers for the Secretary of State. In contrast the proposed EU Digital Services Act only includes vague references to such self- and co-regulatory agreements under Art. 35 (“The Commission and the Board shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation”, with a focus on tackling “different types of illegal content and systemic risks”) and under Art. 36 (relating to online advertising). This talk will discuss opportunities and potential pitfalls for Copyright policy from these emerging Codes. Codes of practice and Codes of conduct imply ongoing revision and flexibility, which makes them a potentially attractive regulatory tool for fast developing industries and markets. Unlike statutes, Codes do not involve a complex legislative procedure. They can be more responsive to changing circumstances. On the other hand, a Code’s legal standing and enforcement conditions are often uncertain. State functions may be delegated to private firms without democratic scrutiny and appropriate procedural safeguards.

Ansprechpartnerin: Marina Chugunova