Patent value in Universities

Transcription

1 European European Patent value in Universities World Conference on Intellectual Capital for Communities, June 2930, 2006, Paris, World Bank Bruno van Pottelsberghe Chief Economist, EPO Strong increase of filings at EPO European Patent Applications Filings Eurodirect PCT International Total Filings Source: EPO 2 1

2 Valuing Patents? Various approaches to value Some new insights into what determines value: the case of academic patents 3 'Value' metrics for patents $$$ Financial value (NPV) induced by protection For how much would you sell it (PATVAL) Net present value induced by licensing Mea / / Av Technological/scientific Impact on new inventions: Forward Patent Citations Patent granted Value witnesses Renewed for several years (costs) Patent families (costs) Oppositions to grant Has been licensed to other firm Has been used for HTSU / 4 2

3 The cost of patenting Filing and examination fees Patent attorney for document Patent attorney for interaction Patent attorney for translations Validation fees Renewal fees Easy to assess In house or outsourced transaction cost Attorney and translation cost main cost driver Process costs Process and translation Process and external serv. TOTAL 10 years TOTAL 20 years 8,070 20,175 Source: van Pottelsberghe and François (2006) 4,670 6,575 3,065 1,541 EPO3 EPO13 USPTO JPO 6 3

4 Attorney and translation cost main cost driver Cost of a sample European patent (in % of EUR) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% ~ EUR ~ EUR EPO fees Int. PCT fees Renewal fees to National Offices & related cost Translation & related cost Professional representation (attorneys) Euro direct Euro PCT Note: Additional cost for professional representation are included in the categories for renewal fees and translation cost (mainly under related cost). Companyinternal administrative costs are not included. Source: Roland Berger Market Research, EPO 7 Fast growing market for technology 120 Royalty and Licensing fees (in billion USD) Payments 60 Receipts Source: Athreye and Cantwell (2005) 8 4

5 Licensing more important for small firms and academia Patent uses by type of applicant 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Not used Internally used only Crosslic. Licensed only Large Firms Medium Firms Small Firms Univ. & Res. Institutions Licensed & int. used Source: PatValEU (6635 EPO Patents ) 9 Percentage of university patents in total EPO patents (assignees) 14,0% 12,0% 10,0% Professors privilege ,0% 6,0% 4,0% 2,0% 0,0% Belgium Germany Spain France UK Italy Sweden Own calculation, from van Looy et al. (2006). 10 5

6 Investigation for Belgian biotech patents 239 corporate patents 155 academic patents Value indicator: forward patent citations Value determinants: Backward patent citations Non patent citations Family size Complexity...new determinants 11 Value distribution is similar in business and academic sectors 70% 60% % EPO applicat 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% #forward citations UNIV IND 12 6

7 Identification of institutional sources of knowledge Non patent citations (literature : /0) Self () = own tacit and codified knowledge, experience Non self () = public domain, more competition, imposed? Backward patent citations (literature : ) Self () = incremental innovation wrt own previous research PRI () = important scientific content Industry (?) 13 New determinants Scientific Literature Negative & significant effect of nonself NPC Positive & significant effect of self NPC Technological Literature (Patents) Positive & significant effect of public BPC Collaboration Positive & significant effect of collaboration with industry 14 7

8 Concluding remarks Universities are new actors in the patent arena, with a high variations within Europe. Few patents are actually used (or generate revenues) Preliminary investigation EPOOECD Has the average value increased or decreased? The cost of a European patent (once granted) reflects the lack of integration of the European market for technology The institutional sources of knowledge allow for a better understanding of what determines value. Target scientists with a high publication record when implementing industryuniversity partnership policies 15 References Athreye S.S. and Cantwell J. A. (2005). Creating Competition? Globalisation and the Emergence of New Technology Producers. Open University Economics Discussion Paper, 52. Available at SSRN. Guellec, D. and van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patents. Economic Letters, 69/1), Rolland Berger, (2005), Study on the cost of patenting in Europe, prepared on behalf of the EPO by Roland Berger Market Research. Sapsalis E., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., The institutional sources of knowledge and the value of academic patents. Economics of Innovation and New Technologies, forthcoming, available also on CEB Working Papers, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Solvay Business School, Centre Emile Bernheim (CEB), WPCEB Saragossi, S., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B., What patent data reveals about universities The case of Belgium. Journal of Technology Transfer 28(1), Sapsalis, E., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2006). From science to license: an exploratory analysis of the value of academic patents. Working Paper, Centre Emile Bernheim, SBS, ULB, forthcoming. Van Looy, B., Du Plessis, M. and Magerman, T. (2006), 'Data Production Methods for Harmonized Patent Indicators: Assignee sector allocation', EUROSTAT Working Paper and Studies, Luxemburg. Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. and François, D. (2006) The Cost Factor in Patent Systems Working Papers CEB (available on RepEc), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Solvay Business School. 16 8