Co-patents are outcomes of R&D collaboration, which has been proven with higher-quality. Does this mean that high-quality patents should also extend their advantage to the technology market? Based on the transaction cost theory, we use the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) database and logit model to explore the effect of co-ownership on firms’ patent commercialization and the factors of co-patents that affect their commercialization. Our findings illustrate that co-ownership has a negative impact on patent commercialization. In addition, the co-owner’s nature, country, and co-patent’s industry influence the commercialization of co-patents. Firstly, a company and a university or research institution’s co-owned co-patents are less likely to be commercialization than a company and a company co-owned co-patents. Secondly, multi-countries co-owned co-patents are less likely to be commercialization than a single-country co-owned co-patents. Thirdly, co-patents in high technology (high-tech) industries are less likely to be commercialization than co-patents in non-high-tech industries. This paper supports policymakers in implementing policies to promote the co-patents’ commercialization. Meanwhile, our paper suggests that to pursue the economic value of the R&D collaborative intellectual property fruits, R&D collaborative intellectual property fruits are not be encouraged to be applied as the co-patents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: