Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter February 26, 2020

Acquisitions for Sleep

  • Pehr-Johan Norbäck , Charlotta Olofsson and Lars Persson EMAIL logo

Abstract

Within the policy debate, there is a fear that large incumbent firms buy small firms’ inventions to ensure that they are not used in the market. We show that such “acquisitions for sleep” can occur if and only if the quality of a process invention is small; otherwise, the entry profit will be higher than the entry-deterring value. We then show that the incentive for acquiring for the purpose of putting a patent to sleep decreases when the intellectual property law is stricter because the profit for the entrant then increases more than the entry-deterring value does.

JEL Classification: G24; L1; L2; M13; O3

References

Arora, A. 1995. “Licensing Tacit Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights And The Market For Know-How.” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 4 (1): 41–60.10.1080/10438599500000013Search in Google Scholar

Arora, A., A. Fosfuri, and A. Gambardella, 2001. “Markets for Technology and their Implications for Corporate Strategy.” Industrial and Corporate Change 10 (2): 419–51.10.1093/icc/10.2.419Search in Google Scholar

Arrow, Kenneth. 1962. “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention.” In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors edited by Richard Nelson, 609–26. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400879762-024Search in Google Scholar

Boldrin, M., and D. K. Levine. 2013. “The Case Against Patents.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 27 (1): 3–22.10.20955/wp.2012.035Search in Google Scholar

Cunningham, Colleen, Florian Ederer, and Song Ma. Killer Acquisitions (March 22, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3241707 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3241707.10.2139/ssrn.3241707Search in Google Scholar

Choi, J. P., and H. Gerlach. 2017. “A Theory of Patent Portfolios.” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 9 (1): 315–51.10.1257/mic.20150003Search in Google Scholar

Federico, Giulio, Gregor Langus, and Tommaso Valletti. 2017. “A Simple Model of Mergers and Innovation.” Economics Letters 157: 136–40.10.1016/j.econlet.2017.06.014Search in Google Scholar

Federico, Giulio, Gregor Langus, and Tommaso Valletti. 2018. “Horizontal Mergers and Product Innovation.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 59: 1–23.10.1016/j.ijindorg.2018.03.001Search in Google Scholar

Gans, J. S., D. H. Hsu, and S. Stern. 2002. “When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?” RAND Journal of Economics 33 (4): 571–86.10.3386/w7851Search in Google Scholar

Gans, J. S., D. H. Hsu, and S. Stern. 2008. “The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market for Ideas: Evidence from Patent Grant Delays.” Management Science 54, no. 5 (May): 982–97.10.1287/mnsc.1070.0814Search in Google Scholar

Gans, Joshua, and Lars Persson, 2013. “Entrepreneurial Commercialization Choices and the Interaction Between IPR and Competition Policy.” Industrial and Corporate Change 22, no. 1 (February): 131-51.10.1093/icc/dts049Search in Google Scholar

Gans, J. S., and S. Stern. 2003. “The Product Market and the Market for “Ideas”: Commercialization Strategies for Technology entrepreneurs.” Research Policy 32 (2): 333–50.10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00103-8Search in Google Scholar

Gilbert, R. J., and D. M. G. Newbery. 1982. “Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly.” American Economic Review 72 (3): 514–26.Search in Google Scholar

Gilbert, Richard. 2018. “Mergers and R & D Diversity: How Much Competition is Enough?” UC Berkeley Economics Working Paper.10.2139/ssrn.3190478Search in Google Scholar

Gotts, I. K., and S. Sher. 2012, “The Particular Antitrust Concerns with Patent Acquisitions.” Competition Law International August. https://www.wsgr.com/images/content/1/3/130/sher-august-12.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Hovenkamp, Erik N., and Herbert J. Hovenkamp. 2017. “Buying Monopoly: Antitrust Limits on Damages for Externally Acquired Patents”. Faculty Scholarship. 1791. http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1791.10.2139/ssrn.2767098Search in Google Scholar

Jehiel, P., and B. Moldovanu. 2000. “Auctions with Downstream Interaction among Buyers.” RAND Journal of Economics 31 (4): 768–91.10.2307/2696358Search in Google Scholar

Jehiel, P., B. Moldovanu, and E. Stacchetti. 1999. “Multidimensional Mechanism design for auctions with externalities.” Journal of Economic Theory 85: 258–93.10.1006/jeth.1998.2501Search in Google Scholar

Mankiw, N. Gregory, and Michael D. Whinston. 1986. “Free Entry and Social Inefficiency.” The RAND Journal of Economics 17, no. 1. (Spring): 48–58.10.2307/2555627Search in Google Scholar

Motta, Massimo, and Emanuele Tarantino. 2017. “The Effect of Horizontal Mergers, When Firms Compete in Prices and Investments.” UPF Economics Working Papers.Search in Google Scholar

Norbäck, P. J., and L. Persson. 2012. “Entrepreneurial Innovations, Competition and Competition Policy.” European Economic Review 56 (3): 488–506.10.1016/j.euroecorev.2011.12.001Search in Google Scholar

Norbäck, P. J., L. Persson, and R. Svensson. 2016. “Creative Destruction and Productive Preemptive Acquisitions.” Journal of Business Venturing 31 (3): 326–43.10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.03.001Search in Google Scholar

Morton, F. M. S., and S. Shapiro. 2014. “Strategic Patent Acquisition.” Antitrust Law Journal 79 (2): 463–99.Search in Google Scholar

Salant, Stephen W., Sheldon Switzer, and Robert J. Reynolds. 1983. “Losses from Horizontal Merger: The Effects of an Exogenous Change in Industry Structure on Cournot–Nash Equilibrium.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 98, no. 2 (May): 185–99.10.2307/1885620Search in Google Scholar

Torrisi, S., A. Gambardella, P. Giuri, D. Harhoff, K. Hoisl, and M. Mariani. 2016. “Used, Blocking and Sleeping Patents: Empirical Evidence from a Large-Scale Inventor Survey.” Research Policy 45 (7): 1374–85.10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.021Search in Google Scholar

Ziedonis, R. 2004. “Don’t Fence Me In: Fragmented Markets for Technology and the Patent Acquisition Strategies of Firms.” Management Science 50 (6): 804–20.10.1287/mnsc.1040.0208Search in Google Scholar


Supplementary Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2019-0021).


Published Online: 2020-02-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 26.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/bejeap-2019-0021/html
Scroll to top button