Prof. Dr. Fabian Gaessler
Affiliated Research Fellow
Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research
Assistant Professor, Universitat Pompeu Fabra
fabian.gaessler(at)ip.mpg.de
Arbeitsbereiche
Innovationsökonomik, Wissenschaftsökonomik, empirische Industrieökonomik, empirische Methoden, Innovationspolitik, Patentdurchsetzung, Patentstreitigkeiten, Patenteinspruch, Datenexklusivität, Technologiebeschaffung, Patentübertragung, Pharmaindustrie, standardessentielle Patente, Künstliche Intelligenz
Wissenschaftlicher Werdegang
Seit 2022
Affiliated Research Fellow
Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb
Seit 2022
Assistant Professor
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Department of Economics and Business
Seit 2022
Affiliated Professor
Barcelona School of Economics
2019
Visiting Professor
IESE Business School, Strategic Management Department
2018 – 2019
Interim Professor for Technology Management
Technical University of Munich, TUM School of Management
2015 – 2022
Senior Research Fellow am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb (Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research)
2013 – 2015
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter und Doktorand am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb (Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research). Dissertation: Enforcing and Trading Patents - Evidence for Europe
2010 – 2013
Postgraduales Studium der Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der International Max Planck Research School for Competition and Innovation, München
2009 – 2010
Studium der Organisation, Management und Governance (M.Sc.) an der London School of Economics and Political Science, London
2008 – 2011
Honors Degree in Technology Management am Center for Digital Technology and Management, München
2007 – 2010
Praktika im Beratungs-, Telekommunikations- und akademischen Bereich
2005 – 2009
Studium der Betriebswirtschaftslehre (B.Sc.) an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München und der University of California, Santa Barbara
Publikationen
Artikel in referierten Fachzeitschriften
Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition, Management Science 2024, forthcoming.
(2024).- We study the blocking effect of patents on follow-on innovation by others. We posit that follow-on innovation requires freedom to operate (FTO), which firms typically obtain through a license from the patentee holding the original innovation. Where licensing fails, follow-on innovation is blocked unless
firms gain FTO through patent invalidation. Using large-scale data from post-grant oppositions at the European Patent Office, we find that patent invalidation increases follow-on innovation, measured in citations, by 16% on average. This effect exhibits a U-shape in the value of the original innovation.
For patents on low-value original innovations, invalidation predominantly increases low-value follow-on innovation outside the patentee’s product market. Here, transaction costs likely exceed the joint surplus of licensing, causing licensing failure. In contrast, for patents on high-value original innovations,
invalidation mainly increases high-value follow-on innovation in the patentee’s product market. We attribute this latter result to rent dissipation, which renders patentees unwilling to license out valuable technologies to (potential) competitors. - Also published as: CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper, No. 494
Training with AI ‒ Evidence from Chess Computers, Strategic Management Journal, 44 (11), 2724-2750. DOI
(2023).- We suggest that AI can help decision-makers learn; specifically, that it can help them learn strategic interactions by serving as artificial training partners and thus help them to overcome a bottleneck of scarce human training partners. We present evidence from chess computers, the first widespread incarnation of AI. Leveraging the staggered diffusion of chess computers, we find that they did indeed help chess players improve by serving as a substitute for scarce human training partners. We also illustrate that chess computers were not a perfect substitute, as players training with them were not exposed to and thus did not learn to exploit idiosyncratic (“human”) mistakes. We discuss implications for research on learning, on AI in management and strategy, and on competitive advantage.
Truly Standard-Essential Patents? - A Semantics-Based Analysis, Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 32 (1), 132-157. DOI
(2023).- Standard-essential patents (SEPs) have become a key element of technical coordination via standard-setting organizations. Yet, in many cases, it remains unclear whether a declared SEP is truly standard-essential. To date, there is no automated procedure that allows for a scalable and objective assessment of SEP status. This paper introduces a semantics-based method for approximating the standard essentiality of patents. We provide details on the procedure that generates the measure of standard essentiality and present the results of several validation and robustness exercises. We illustrate the measure's usefulness in estimating the share of true SEPs in firm patent portfolios for several telecommunication standards.
- Also published as: CEPR Discussion Paper DP14726
Should There Be Lower Taxes on Patent Income?, Research Policy 50. DOI
(2021).- A “patent box” is a term for the application of a lower corporate tax rate to the income derived from the ownership of patents. This tax subsidy instrument has been introduced in a number of countries since 2000. Using comprehensive data on patents filed at the European Patent Office, including information on ownership transfers pre- and post-grant, we investigate the impact of the introduction of a patent box on international patent transfers, on the choice of ownership location, and on innovative activity in the relevant country. We find that the impact on transfers is small but present, especially when the tax instrument does not contain a development condition and for high value patents (those most likely to have generated income), but that innovation as proxied by R&D and patents is not affected. We also find that introducing a patent box reduces patent transfers out of the country. These results call into question whether the patent box is an effective instrument for encouraging innovation in a country, rather than simply preventing or facilitating the shifting of corporate income to low tax jurisdictions.
- Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 18-18
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs, The Review of Economics and Statistics 2020. DOI
(2020).- Pharmaceutical firms typically enjoy market exclusivity for new drugs from concurrent protection of the underlying invention (through patents) and the clinical trials data submitted for market approval (through data exclusivity). Patent invalidation during drug development renders data exclusivity the sole source of protection and shifts the period of market exclusivity at the project level. Patent invalidation therefore constitutes a natural experiment that allows us to causally identify how the duration of market exclusivity affects firms' incentives to innovate. In instrumental variables regressions we quantify the effect of a one-year reduction in expected market exclusivity on the likelihood of drug commercialization. We provide first estimates of the responsiveness of R&D investments to market exclusivity expectations and hereby inform the ongoing policy debate on the regulation of intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical industry.
- Also published as CRC Discussion Paper No. 176
- Also published at SSRN
Fire and Mice: The Effect of Supply Shocks on Basic Science, Academy of Management Proceedings, 2020 (1). DOI
(2020).- We study how a negative supply shock to research-related assets affects the production of scientific knowledge. In particular, we exploit the 1989 Morrell Park fire that destroyed a considerable share of the world's largest mice breeding facility, the Jackson Laboratory, and killed approximately 400,000 mice. This fire led to an unforeseen and substantial supply shortage in mice for the North American biomedical research community, which we can isolate at the strain and scientist level based on proprietary archival data. Using difference-in-differences estimations, we find that the scientific productivity of affected scientists decreases when measured in simple publication counts, but much less so when we adjust for the publications' quality. Moreover, affected researchers are more likely to initiate research that is unrelated to their previous work. This indicates that affected scientists switched research trajectories but maintained their scientific impact. In the aggregate, the temporary supply shortage of particular mice strains led to a permanent decrease in their usage among U.S.\ scientists. These results highlight the important role of supply chains in basic science."
Filling the Gap - Firm Strategies for Human Capital Loss, Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2020 (1), 2020 (1)71. DOI
(2020).- This paper explores how the premature death of an inventor affects the productivity and career trajectories of co-inventors. To this end, we develop and analyze a dataset covering the careers of 152,350 German inventors. The data combine highly precise employer-employee data from official social security registers with patent office information covering the period from 1980-2014. Departing from 799 registered premature deaths of inventors and the same number of matched inventors, we study how co-inventors were affected by the death of their peers. Using a difference-in-differences and an event study design, we investigate the reaction of the co-inventors' patenting activities, career advancement and job mobility. Using a number of measures and robustness checks, our results show that the premature death of a co-inventor reduces the productivity of the surviving co-inventors. The effect sets in immediately and survivors do not seem to recover from the shock in the five years following. We argue that employers will seek to retain co-inventors under certain conditions in order to continue lines of research and invention. The empirical results confirm our expectations: surviving inventors are significantly less likely to move to a different employer and are more likely to be promoted compared to inventors in the control group. These effects seem to diminish after about two years."
Science Quality and the Value of Inventions, Science Advances, 5 (12), eaay7323. DOI
(2019).- Despite decades of research, the relationship between the quality of science and the value of inventions has remained unclear. We present the result of a large-scale matching exercise between 4.8 million patent families and 43 million publication records. We find a strong positive relationship between quality of scientific contributions referenced in patents and the value of the respective inventions. We rank patents by the quality of the science they are linked to. Strikingly, high-rank patents are twice as valuable as low-rank patents, which in turn are about as valuable as patents without direct science link. We show this core result for various science quality and patent
value measures. The effect of science quality on patent value remains relevant even when science is linked indirectly through other patents. Our findings imply that what is considered “excellent” within the science sector also leads to outstanding outcomes in the technological or commercial realm. - Also published as: arXiv preprint 1903.05020
- Article: Excellence Breeds Invention, Research Europe 510 (2020), 11
Litigation of Standards-essential Patents in Europe – A Comparative Analysis, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 32 (4), 1457-1488.
(2018).Patents and Cumulative Innovation – Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions, Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017 (1). DOI
(2017).- Using large-scale data on opposition to patents at the European Patent Office (EPO), we investigate the causal effect of a patent’s invalidation on follow-on inventions. We introduce a new instrumental variable exploiting the participation or absence of the patent examiner in the opposition proceeding. According to our baseline model, patent invalidation leads to a highly significant and sizable increase of forward citations. While this is in line with previous studies, disentangling the effect leads us to results that stand in stark contrast to some of the literature. We find that the effects are most pronounced for patents in discrete technology areas, for areas where patent thickets are absent and for patents which are not protected by ""patent fences"". Moreover, the effect is particularly strong for relatively small patent holders facing comparatively small follow-on innovators.
Patent Litigation in Europe, European Journal of Law and Economics, 44 (1), 1-44. DOI
(2017).- We compare patent litigation cases across four European jurisdictions—Germany, the UK (England and Wales), France, The Netherlands—using case-level data gathered from cases filed in the four jurisdictions during the period 2000–2008. Overall, we find substantial differences across jurisdictions in terms of caseloads—notably, courts in Germany hear by far the largest number of cases, not only in absolute terms, but also when taking macro-economic indicators into account—and we further find important cross-country variances in terms of case outcomes. Moreover, we show empirically that a considerable number of patents are litigated across multiple European jurisdictions; and further, that in the majority of these cases divergent case outcomes are reached across the different jurisdictions, suggesting that the long-suspected problem of inconsistency of decision-making in European patent litigation is in fact real. Finally, we note that the coming into force of the Unified Patent Court in Europe may, in the long term, help to alleviate this inconsistency problem.
- Also published as: ZEW Discussion Paper No. 13-072
Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of the Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 131 (PA), 218-242. DOI
(2016).- In bifurcated patent litigation systems, claims of infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently of each other in separate court proceedings at different courts. In non-bifurcated systems, infringement and validity are decided jointly in the same proceedings at a single court. We build a model that shows the key trade-off between bifurcated and non-bifurcated systems and how it affects the incentives of plaintiffs and defendants in patent infringement cases. Using detailed data on patent litigation cases in Germany (bifurcated) and the U.K. (non-bifurcated), we show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. We also show that having to challenge a patent's validity in separate court proceedings under bifurcation implies that alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find this to apply in particular to more resource-constrained alleged infringers. Finally, we find parties to be more likely to settle in a bifurcated system.
- Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-14
- Also published as ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 14-072
Herausgeberwerke
Study on the legal aspects of Supplementary Protection Certificates in the EU. Final report. Brussel: European Commission. DOI
(2018).Beiträge in Sammelwerken
Section 16.2 - Duration of the SPC (Art. 13 Reg. 469/2009) - Effective length of SPC protection, in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (
Chapter 16 - Duration of the SPC (Art. 13 Reg. 469/2009), in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (
Annex V - SPC Statistics to Chapter 7, in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (
Chapter 7 - Overall Use of the SPC System in the EU, in: Roberto Romandini, Reto M. Hilty, Annette Kur (
Patent Assertion Entities in Europe, in: D. Daniel Sokol (
- This book chapter presents the findings of an empirical study of U.K. and German patent litigation involving patent assertion entities (PAEs). Overall, we find that PAEs account for roughly ten percent of patent suits filed in these countries during the time periods covered by our study: 2000-2013 for the UK and 2000-2008 for Germany. We also present a variety of additional data on the characteristics of European PAE suits and PAE-asserted patents and, finally, consider what our findings suggest are the most important reasons PAEs tend to avoid European courts. We conclude that, while many factors likely contribute to the relative scarcity of PAEs in Europe, the continent’s fee-shifting regimes stand out as a key deterrent to patent monetization.
- Also published at SSRN
Andere Veröffentlichungen, Presseartikel, Interviews
Ökonomenstimme 2020.
(2020). Beeinflusst das Arbeitsangebot Automatisierungsinnovation?,Research Europe, (510), 11.
(2020). Excellence Breeds Invention. The Most Highly Cited Papers Feature in the Most Valuable Patents,- Article "Science Quality and the Value of Inventions" in Science Advances, Vol. 5 (2019) No. 12, eaay7323
- More detailed online version of the article in Research Europe, which was the basis for the printed article.
Approximating the Standard Essentiality of Patents – A Semantics-Based Analysis, Report for the EPO Academic Research Programme.
(2020).Monographien
Enforcing and Trading Patents – Evidence for Europe (Innovation und Entrepreneurship). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. DOI
(2016).Diskussionspapiere
Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper, No. 494.
(2024).- We study the blocking effect of patents on follow-on innovation by others. We posit that follow-on innovation requires freedom to operate (FTO), which firms typically obtain through a license from the patentee holding the original innovation. Where licensing fails, follow-on innovation is blocked unless
firms gain FTO through patent invalidation. Using large-scale data from post-grant oppositions at the European Patent Office, we find that patent invalidation increases follow-on innovation, measured in citations, by 16% on average. This effect exhibits a U-shape in the value of the original innovation.
For patents on low-value original innovations, invalidation predominantly increases low-value follow-on innovation outside the patentee’s product market. Here, transaction costs likely exceed the joint surplus of licensing, causing licensing failure. In contrast, for patents on high-value original innovations,
invalidation mainly increases high-value follow-on innovation in the patentee’s product market. We attribute this latter result to rent dissipation, which renders patentees unwilling to license out valuable technologies to (potential) competitors. - https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/discussion_paper/494.pdf
- Forthcoming in: Management Science
Market Size and Research: Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry, NBER Working Paper, No. w28858.
(2023).- Prior literature has established a link between changes in market size and pharmaceutical innovation; whether a link exists with scientific research remains an open question. If upstream research is not responsive to these changes, the kinds of scientific discoveries that flow into future drug development could be disconnected from downstream demand. We explore this question by exploiting the effects of quasi-experimental variation in market size introduced by Medicare Part D. We find no causal relationship between market size and biomedical research in the decade following the implementation of Medicare Part D. While many factors have been shown to motivate scientists to conduct research, this result suggests that changes in market size provide no such incentive. We do find, however, limited support for a response by corporate scientists conducting applied research. Implications for pharmaceutical innovation policy are discussed.
- Available at SSRN
- Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 21-16
Filling the Gap: The Consequences of Collaborator Loss in Corporate R&D, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 22-17.
(2022).- We examine how collaborator loss affects knowledge workers in corporate R&D. We argue that such a loss affects the remaining collaborators not only by reducing their team-specific capital (as argued in the prior literature) but also by increasing their bargaining power over the employer, who is in need of filling the gap left by the lost collaborator to ensure the continuation of R&D projects. This shift in bargaining power may, in turn, lead to benefits, such as additional resources or more attractive working conditions. These benefits can partially compensate for the negative effect of reduced team-specific capital on productivity and influence the career trajectories of the remaining collaborators. We empirically investigate the consequences of collaborator loss by exploiting 845 unexpected deaths of active inventors. We find that inventor death has a moderate negative effect on the productivity of the remaining collaborators. This negative effect disappears when we focus on the remaining collaborators who work for the same employer as the deceased inventor. Moreover, this group is more likely to be promoted and less likely to leave their current employer.
- Available at SSRN
The Returns to Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 21-19. DOI
(2021).- We establish the importance of physical capital in knowledge production. To this end, we exploit adverse events (explosions, fires, floods, etc.) at research institutions as exogenous physical capital shocks. Scientists experience a substantial and persistent reduction in research output if they lose specialized physical capital, that is, equipment and material they created over time for a particular research purpose. In contrast, they quickly recover if they only lose generic physical capital. Affected scientists in older laboratories, which presumably lose more obsolete physical capital, are more likely to change their direction of research and recover in scientific productivity. These findings suggest that a scientist's investments into their own physical capital yield lasting returns but also create path dependence in relation to research direction.
Market Size and Research: Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 21-16.
(2021).- Prior literature has established a link between changes in market size and pharmaceutical innovation; whether a link exists with scientific research remains an open question. If upstream research is not responsive to these changes, the kinds of scientific discoveries that flow into future drug development could be disconnected from downstream demand. We explore this question by exploiting the effects of quasi-experimental variation in market size introduced by Medicare Part D. We find no causal relationship between market size and biomedical research in the decade following the implementation of Medicare Part D. While many factors have been shown to motivate scientists to conduct research, this result suggests that changes in market size provide no such incentive. We do find, however, limited support for a response by corporate scientists conducting applied research. Implications for pharmaceutical innovation policy are discussed.
- Available at SSRN
- Also published as NBER Working Paper No. w28858
Labor Supply and Automation Innovation, CESifo Working Paper, No. 8410.
(2020).- While economic theory suggests substitutability between labor and capital, little evidence exists regarding the causal effect of labor supply on inventing labor-saving technologies. We analyze the impact of exogenous changes in regional labor supply on automation innovation by exploiting an immigrant placement policy in Germany during the 1990s and 2000s. Difference-in-differences estimates indicate that one additional worker per 1,000 manual and unskilled workers reduces automation innovation by 0.05 patents. The effect is most pronounced two years after immigration and confined to industries containing many low-skilled workers. Labor market tightness and external demand are plausible mechanisms for the labor-innovation nexus.
- Available at SSRN
- Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 20-09
- Also published as: IZA Discussion Paper No. 13429
Labor Supply and Automation Innovation, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 20-09.
(2020).- While economic theory suggests substitutability between labor and capital, little evidence exists regarding the causal effect of labor supply on inventing labor-saving technologies. We analyze the impact of exogenous changes in regional labor supply on automation innovation by exploiting an immigrant placement policy in Germany during the 1990s and 2000s. Difference-in-differences estimates indicate that one additional worker per 1,000 manual and unskilled workers reduces automation innovation by 0.05 patents. The effect is most pronounced two years after immigration and confined to industries containing many low-skilled workers. Labor market tightness and external demand are plausible mechanisms for the labor-innovation nexus.
- Available at SSRN
- Also published as: IZA DP No. 13429
- Also published as: CESifo Working Paper No. 8410
Truly Standard-Essential Patents? - A Semantics-Based Analysis, CEPR Discussion Paper, 14726. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.
(2020).- Standard-essential patents (SEPs) have become a key element of technical coordination in standard-setting organizations. Yet, in many cases, it remains unclear whether a declared SEP is truly standard-essential. To date, there is no automated procedure that allows for a scalable and objective assessment of SEP status. This paper introduces a semantics-based method for approximating the standard essentiality of patents. We provide details on the procedure that generates the measure of standard essentiality and present the results of several validation exercises. In a first empirical application we illustrate the measure's usefulness in estimating the share of true SEPs in firm patent portfolios for several mobile telecommunication standards. We find firm-level differences that are statistically significant and economically substantial. Furthermore, we observe a general decline in the average share of presumably true SEPs between successive standard generations.
- https://cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=14726
- Also published in: Journal of Economics & Management Strategy
Labor Supply and Automation Innovation, IZA DP, No. 13429. Bonn: IZA – Institute of Labor Economics.
(2020).- While economic theory suggests substitutability between labor and capital, little evidence exists regarding the causal effect of labor supply on inventing labor-saving technologies. We analyze the impact of exogenous changes in regional labor supply on automation innovation by exploiting an immigrant placement policy in Germany during the 1990s and 2000s. Difference-in-differences estimates indicate that one additional worker per 1,000 manual and unskilled workers reduces automation innovation by 0.05 patents. The effect is most pronounced two years after immigration and confined to industries containing many low-skilled workers. Labor market tightness and external demand are plausible mechanisms for the labor-innovation nexus.
- https://www.iza.org/de/publications/dp/13429/labor-supply-and-automation-innovation
- Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 20-09
- Also published as: CESifo Working Paper No. 8410
Bargaining Failure and Freedom to Operate: Re-Evaluating the Effect of Patents on Cumulative Innovation, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 19-11. DOI
(2019).Bargaining Failure and Freedom to Operate: Re-evaluating the Effect of Patents on Cumulative Innovation, CEPR Discussion Paper, 13969.
(2019).- We investigate the causal effect of patent rights on cumulative innovation, using large-scale data that approximate the patent universe in its technological and economic variety. We introduce a novel instrumental variable for patent invalidation that exploits personnel scarcity in post-grant opposition at the European Patent Ofï¬ ce. We ï¬ nd that patent invalidation leads to a highly signiï¬ cant and sizeable increase of follow-on inventions. The effect is driven by cases where the removal of the individual exclusion right creates substantial freedom to operate for third parties. Importantly, our results suggest that bargaining failure between original and follow-on innovators is not limited to environments commonly associated with high transaction costs.
- https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/13969.html
- Also published as: Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 19-11
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs, CRC Discussion Paper, No. 176.
(2019).- Pharmaceutical firms typically enjoy market exclusivity for new drugs from concurrent protection of the underlying invention (through patents) and the clinical trials data submitted for market approval (through data exclusivity). Patent invalidation during drug development renders data exclusivity the
sole source of protection and shifts the period of market exclusivity at the project level. In instrumental variables regressions we quantify the effect of a one-year reduction in expected market exclusivity on the
likelihood of drug commercialization. The effect is largely driven by patent invalidations early in the drug development process and by the responses of large originators. We hereby provide first estimates of the responsiveness of R&D investments to market exclusivity expectations. - https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/discussion_paper/176.pdf
- Also published at SSRN
- Published in: The Review of Economics and Statistics (2022) 104 (3), pp. 571–586.
Science Quality and the Value of Inventions, arXiv preprint 1903.05020.
(2019).- Despite decades of research, the relationship between the quality of science and the value of inventions has remained unclear. We present the result of a large-scale matching exercise between 4.8 million patent families and 43 million publication records. We find a strong positive relationship between quality of scientific contributions referenced in patents and the value of the respective inventions. We rank patents by the quality of the science they are linked to. Strikingly, high-rank patents are twice as valuable as low-rank patents, which in turn are about as valuable as patents without direct science link. We show this core result for various science quality and patent
value measures. The effect of science quality on patent value remains relevant even when science is linked indirectly through other patents. Our findings imply that what is considered “excellent” within the science sector also leads to outstanding outcomes in the technological or commercial realm. - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.05020.pdf
- Also published in Science Advances 2019, Vol. 5, No. 12, eaay7323
Should There Be Lower Taxes on Patent Income?, CRC Discussion Paper (CRC/TR 190 Rationality and Competition), No. 177.
(2019).- A "patent box" is a term for the application of a lower corporate tax rate to the income derived from the ownership of patents. This tax subsidy instrument has been introduced in a number of countries since 2000. Using comprehensive data on patents filed at the European Patent Office, including information on ownership transfers pre- and post-grant, we investigate the impact of the introduction of a patent box on international patent transfers, on the choice of ownership location, and on invention in the relevant country. We find that the impact on transfers is small but present, especially when the tax instrument contains a development condition and for high value patents (those most likely to have generated income), but that invention itself is not affected. This calls into question whether the patent box is an effective instrument for encouraging innovation in a country, rather than simply facilitating the shifting of corporate income to low tax jurisdictions.
- https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/discussion_paper/177.pdf
- Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 18-18
- Published in: Research Polic, Volume 50, Issue 1, January 2021, 104129
Patent Transfers and Patent Citations, HAL archives ouvertes, No. hal-02307096.
(2019).Should There Be Lower Taxes on Patent Income?, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 18-18.
(2018).- A “patent box” is a term for the application of a lower corporate tax rate to the income derived from the ownership of patents. This tax subsidy instrument has been introduced in a number of countries since 2000. Using comprehensive data on patent filings at the European Patent Office, including information on ownership transfers pre‐ and post‐grant, we investigate the impact of the introduction of a patent box on international patent transfers, on the choice of ownership location, and on invention in the relevant country. We find that the impact on transfers is small but present, especially when the tax instrument contains a development condition and for high value patents (those most likely to have generated income), but that invention itself is not affected. This calls into question whether the patent box is an effective instrument for encouraging innovation in a country, rather than simply facilitating the shifting of corporate income to low tax jurisdictions.
- Available at SSRN
- Also published as: NBER Working Paper No. w24843
- Also published as CRC Discussion Paper No. 177
- Also published in: Research Policy Volume 50, Issue 1, January 2021, 104129
Openness as Platform Strategy - Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment in Crowdfunding, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 18-05. DOI
(2018).- A platform's decision to open up its marketplace is at the core of its business strategy. It needs to balance between the benefits of market thickness and the costs of potential congestion and quality concerns. We discuss how openness can increase platform value and test our hypotheses by analyzing the strategic decision of a leading crowdfunding platform to switch from access control to de facto openness. The decision increased market thickness on the previously access-controlled supply side of crowdfunding projects. The platform hereby gained market share from its main competitor. Market matches on the platform increased in absolute but not in relative terms. Moreover, quality on the supply side declined immediately, lowering platform value for demand-side users.
- Available at SSRN
Linked Inventor Biography Data 1980-2014, FDZ Data Report, No. 03/2018.
(2018).- This data report describes the Linked Inventor Biography Data 1980-2014 (INV-BIO ADIAB 8014), its generation using record linkage and machine learning methods as well as how to access the data via the FDZ.
- Dieser Datenreport beschreibt die verknüpften Erfinderbiografiedaten 1980-2014 (INV-BIO ADIAB 8014), deren Erstellung mittels Record Linkage und Machine Learning Methoden sowie den Datenzugang über das FDZ.
- http://doku.iab.de/fdz/reporte/2018/DR_03-18_EN.pdf
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Analyzing Court Selection in Patent Litigation, TSE Working Paper, No. 17-775. DOI
(2017).- This paper examines court selection by plaintiffs in patent litigation. We build a forum shopping model that provides a set of predictions regarding plaintiffs’ court preferences, and the way these preferences depend on the market proximity between the plaintiff and the defendant. Then, using a rich dataset of patent litigation at German regional courts between 2003 and 2008, we estimate the determinants of court selection with alternative-specific conditional logit models. In line with our theoretical predictions, our empirical results show that plaintiffs prefer courts that have shorter proceedings, especially when they compete against the defendants they face. Further, we find negative effects of the plaintiff’s, as well as the defendant’s, distance to court on the plaintiff’s court selection. Our empirical analysis also allows us to infer whether plaintiffs perceive a given court as more or less pro-patentee than another one.
Invalid But Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, No. 14-072. DOI
(2014).- We analyze the impact of the probabilistic nature of patents on the functioning of Germany’s bifurcated patent litigation system where infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently by different courts. We show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. Our conservative estimates indicate that 12% of infringement cases in which the patent’s validity is challenged produce such ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions. We also show that having to challenge a patent’s validity in separate court proceedings means that more resource-constrained alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find evidence that ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions create uncertainty which firms that were found to infringe an invalid patent attempt to reduce by filing more oppositions against newly granted patents immediately afterwards.
- Also published as: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Volume 131, Part A, November 2016, 218-242
- Also published as Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 14-14
Invalid But Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 14-14. DOI
(2014).- We analyze the impact of the probabilistic nature of patents on the functioning of Germany’s bifurcated patent litigation system where infringement and validity of a patent are decided independently by different courts. We show that bifurcation creates situations in which a patent is held infringed that is subsequently invalidated. Our conservative estimates indicate that 12% of infringement cases in which the patent’s validity is challenged produce such ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions. We also show that having to challenge a patent’s validity in separate court proceedings means that more resource-constrained alleged infringers are less likely to do so. We find evidence that ‘invalid but infringed’ decisions create uncertainty which firms that were found to infringe an invalid patent attempt to reduce by filing more oppositions against newly granted patents immediately afterwards.
- Also published in Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Volume 131, Part A, 2016, 218 - 242
- Also published as ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 14-072
Patent Litigation in Europe, ZEW Discussion Paper, No. 13-072.
(2013).- We compare patent litigation cases across four European jurisdictions – Germany, France, the Netherlands, and the UK – covering cases filed during the period 2000-2008. For our analysis, we assemble a new dataset that contains detailed information at the case, litigant, and patent level for patent cases filed at the major courts in the four jurisdictions. We find substantial differences across jurisdictions in terms of case loads. Courts in Germany hear by far the largest number of cases in absolute terms, but also when taking country size into account. We also find important between-country differences in terms of outcomes, the share of cases that is appealed, as well as the characteristics of litigants and litigated patents. A considerable number of patents are litigated in multiple jurisdictions, but the majority of patents are subject to litigation only in one of the four jurisdictions.
- http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp13072.pdf
- Also published in European Journal of Law and Economics, August 2017, Volume 44, Issue 1, 1–44
Vorträge
07.12.2021
Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis
Roundtable on Mechanisms, Governance, and Policy Impact of SEP Determination Approaches
Ort: online
03.12.2021
Market Size and Research: Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry
Forschungsseminar
Ort: Schloss Ringberg
26.11.2021
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
IP and Innovation Seminar
Ort: online
17.11.2021
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
HEC Lausanne
Ort: Lausanne, Schweiz
16.11.2021
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
IE Business School
Ort: Madrid, Spanien
04.11.2021
Where AI is a Game Changer – Evidence from Chess Computers
Universidad Carlos III
Ort: online (Madrid, Spanien)
26.10.2021
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
19.10.2021
Fire and Mice: The Effect of Supply Shocks on Research Tool Adoption
DRUID21 Conference
Ort: Kopenhagen, Dänemark
01.10.2021
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
Strategy, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Faculty Workshop
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
29.09.2021
Discussion of Martinelli & Mazzei: Death Squad or Quality Improvement? The Impact of the Recently Established U.S. Post-Grant Review on Patent Quality
PhD in Economics@SSSA-IUSS and @UCA Annual Doctoral Workshop
Ort: online (Pisa, Italien)
09.09.2021
Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation: Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition
European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference
Ort: Madrid, Spanien
29.07.2021
Advances in Patent Research: New Data, Measures, and Methods
Academy of Management Conference
Ort: online
12.03.2021
Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis
Annual Conference of the Mannheim Centre for Competition and Innovation
Ort: online (Mannheim)
02.12.2020
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence From Lab Disasters
Innovation Seminar, LMU
Ort: online (München)
19.11.2020
Where AI Is a Game Changer – Evidence From Chess Computers
TIME Seminar
Ort: online (München)
30.9.2020
Fire and Mice: The Effect of Supply Shocks on Basic Science
German Economic Association Annual Meeting
Ort: online
09.09.2020
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence From Lab Disasters
Forschungsseminar
Ort: online (München)
27.07.2020
Bargaining Failure and Freedom to Operate: Re-Evaluating the Effect of Patents on Cumulative Innovation
IP Day 2020: Intellectual Property and Technology Markets
Ort: online (Boston, USA)
17.03.2020
Truly Standard-Essential Patents? A Semantics-Based Analysis
82nd Annual Business Researcher (VHB) Conference
Ort: online (Frankfurt)
02.03.2020
Filling the Gap – Firm Strategies for Human Capital Loss
Forschungsseminar
Ort: Zugspitze
17.01.2020
Physical Capital in Knowledge Production: Evidence from Lab Disasters
ESMT Berlin
Ort: Berlin
18.11.2019
Knowledge Lost in Capital
Seminar, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Ort: Madrid, Spanien
15.11.2019
Approximating the Standard Essentiality of Patents – A Semantics-Based Analysis
MaCCI Law & Economics Conference on Intellectual Property Proceedings
Ort: Mannheim
09.11.2019
Knowledge Lost in Capital
19th Annual REER Conference, Georgia Tech
Ort: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
05.11.2019
Knowledge Lost in Capital
IESE Business School
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
05.11.2019
AI and Strategic Decision Making – Evidence from Chess Computers
Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
18.10.2019
AI and Strategic Decision Making – Evidence from Chess Computers
Seminar, EPFL Lausanne
Ort: Lausanne, Schweiz
11.10.2019
Disruptive Innovationen
“Wie(viel) Wissen fließt” Stifterverband/Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung Workshop
Ort: Berlin
18.09.2019
AI and Strategic Decision Making – Evidence from Chess Computers
Seminar, ESADE
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
31.08.2019
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
12.08.2019
Approximating the Standard Essentiality of Patents – A Semantics-Based Analysis
Academy of Management Conference
Ort: Boston, Massachusetts, USA
14.06.2019
Approximating the Standard Essentiality of Patents – A Semantics-Based Analysis
Searle Center 12th Annual Innovation Economics Conference, Northwestern University
Ort: Chicago, Illinois, USA
20.05.2019
Knowledge Lost in Capital
Seminar, ESMT Berlin
Ort: Berlin
17.05.2019
Science Quality and the Value of Inventions
Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung, Innopat
Ort: Mannheim
22.03.2019
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Workshop on Patent Rights, ETH Zürich
Ort: Zürich, Schweiz
20.03.2019
Knowledge Lost in Capital
Seminar, ESMT Berlin
Ort: Berlin
04.12.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Workshop on Intellectual Property
Ort: Luxemburg, Luxemburg
27.11.2018
Knowledge Lost in Capital
Behavioral and Empirical Work in Progress Seminar
Ort: Alicante, Spanien
24.10.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
IP Statistics for Decision Makers Conference
Ort: Alicante, Spanien
05.09.2018
A Practitioner’s Guide to Empirical Research on Patents and Innovation
European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference
Ort: Berlin
14.08.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Academy of Management 78th Annual Meeting
Ort: Chicago, USA
20.06.2018
Patent Transfer in Europe - Data Description and Stylized PAE Facts
EPIP NPE/PAE Workshop 2018
Ort: Bordeaux, Frankreich
15.06.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Barcelona GSE Workshop on Economics of Science and Innovation
Ort: Barcelona, Spanien
13.06.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
DRUID18 Conference
Ort: Kopenhagen, Dänemark
27.03.2018
Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
NBER Productivity Seminar
Ort: Cambridge, Vereinigtes Königreich
09.02.2018br />Patents, Data, Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Law & Economics Seminar
Ort: Lüttich, Belgien
23.11.2017
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
MSI Seminar, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Ort: Leuven, Belgien
05.09.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference
Ort: Bordeaux, Frankreich
02.09.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics, Maastricht University
Ort: Maastricht, Niederlande
07.08.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
Academy of Management Annual Meeting
Ort: Atlanta, USA
24.07.2017
Patent Boxes and Patent Transfers
Summer School on Taxation and R&D, Universität Mannheim
Ort: Mannheim
20.06.2017
Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs
Behavioral and Empirical Work in Progress Seminar, Technical University of Munich
Ort: München
13.06.2017
Taking the Crowd by the Hand - The Intermediary Role of Crowdfunding Platforms
DRUID 17 Conference, New York University
Ort: New York, USA
30.05.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Patent Oppositions
Munich Summer Institute 2017
Ort: München
26.05.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
Strategy, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Faculty Workshop, IE Business School
Ort: Madrid, Spanien
15.05.2017
Taking the Crowd by the Hand - The Intermediary Role of Crowdfunding Platforms
ZEW Economics of Innovation and Patenting Conference 2017
Ort: Mannheim
03.04.2017
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
SFB Competiton and Rationality Workshop
Ort: Berlin
16.03.2017
Patent Litigation in Europe
European Intellectual Property Rights and Jurisdiction in Need of Grand Design? MPI Workshop
Ort: Harnackhaus Berlin
29.11.2016
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Granted Patent Oppositions
IO and Trade Seminar
Ort: München
03.09.2016
Litigation of Standard-Essential Patents in Europe - A Comparative Analysis
European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference, University of Oxford
Ort: Oxford, Vereinigtes Königreich
02.09.2016
Patent Transfers in Europe - Data and Methodological Report
European Policy for Intellectual Property Annual Conference, University of Oxford
Ort: Oxford, Vereinigtes Königreich
18.05.2016
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
17th CEPR/JIE School and Conference on Applied Industrial Organisation
Ort: London, Vereinigtes Königreich
01.09.2016
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
European Policy for Intellectual Property 10th Annual Conference
Ort: Glasgow, Vereinigtes Königreich
28.08.2015
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
42nd Annual Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics
Ort: München
02.07.2015
Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation at German Regional Courts
6th ZEW/MaCCI Conference on the Economics of Innovation and Patenting
Ort: Mannheim
29.06.2015
What to Buy When Forum Shopping? Determinants of Court Selection in Patent Litigation
Economic Analysis of Litigation Workshop
Ort: Turin, Italien
27.06.2015
Paneldiskussion: Zur Zukunft der Internetwirtschaft - warum brauchen Unternehmen Patente?
Alumnikonferenz am Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb
Ort: München
11.06.2015
Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation at German Regional Courts
Workshop: 2nd International Meeting in Law & Economics at the University Paris 2-Panthéon-Assas
Ort: Paris, Frankreich
29.08.2014
Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
41st Annual Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics
Ort: Mailand, Italien
23.06.2014
Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
Munich Conference on Innovation and Competition 2014
Ort: Schloss Ringberg
13.01.2014
Forum Shopping in Patent Litigation in Germany
Transatlantic Workshop on Intellectual Property Research
Ort: Zürich, Schweiz
09.08.2013
Invalid but Infringed? An Analysis of Germany's Bifurcated Patent Litigation System
Comparative Patent Litigation in Europe and Evidence on Bifurcation, Workshop at Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys
Ort: London, Vereinigtes Königreich
Ehrungen und wissenschaftliche Preise
2017 Otto-Hahn-Medaille der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Projekte
Patents and Cumulative Innovation - Evidence from Post-Grant Oppositions
Patents, Data Exclusivity and the Development of New Drugs
Patents, Freedom to Operate, and Follow-on Innovation – Evidence from Post-Grant Opposition
Studie zu Ergänzenden Schutzzertifikaten