Source 1:

Citation (MLA): Gallini, Nancy T. "The economics of patents: Lessons from recent US patent
reform." The Journal of Economic Perspectives

16.2 (2002): 131-154.

Source Validation: This was written by a reputable professor of economics at the University of
Toronto, Nancy T. Gallini
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about the US
Patent Reforms that were made in the 2000s.
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication and the technical jargon,
other professors of economics and people of academia are the most likely intended audience.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: ( 1-5 sentences) This source discusses
the patent reforms that were made in the early 2000s because of the internet boom and various
other factors. One of the main things it discussed is how the US extended the life of a patent to
20 years, up from the previous 17 years and the impact this decision has had. This source also
discusses how the software industry has made significant changes to the patent system and
how many revisions and changes were needed to be made to fit the technology boom.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful
in future writing:
In 1994, in compliance with the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPs)
(an agreement emanating from the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade), the United States adopted a 20-year patent term, starting from the date at
which a patent application is filed; previously, the patent term was 17 years from the date
at which the patent was issued.
Suppose innovation is a cumulative process that generates a continuum of
improvements on some pioneer invention (Merges and Nelson, 1990; Scotchmer, 1991).
When patent enforcement is strengthened, the probability increases that the researcher
will prevail as the infringed against a subsequent inventor, but so does the likelihood that
the researcher will lose as the infringer against a previous patent holder (ODonoghue,
Scotchmer and Thisse, 1998).
After an invention is discovered, the researcher has the option to keep the invention
secret and risk independent discovery by another researcher, or to disclose it through a
patent grant. Patents present a bargain between society and the inventor in which
society benefits from disclosure of the invention and the inventor receives exclusive
rights over the technology for 20 years. Disclosure may be socially valuable for several
reasons. At a minimum, patents provide free access to the inventions after the patent

expires, permitting rapid diffusion after 20 years. The information provided in patent
applications may also avoid duplicated research efforts by redirecting research from
proven paths to those less explored. Finally, the disclosure of ideas may inspire further
new ideas. Thus, even if patents are not the primary spur behind innovation, they may
be socially worthwhile if they induce researchers to disclose their inventions.

Source 2:
Citation (MLA): Sichelman, Ted. "Commercializing patents." S
tanford Law Review

(2010):
341-411.
Source Validation: This was written by a law professor of the University of California, San
Diego and the source was published in the Stanford Law Review, a reputable journal
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of patents and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: ( 1-5 sentences) This source discusses
the fact of commercializing patents and looks at start-ups and what they have been doing in
recent years with regards to patenting their creations. It also discusses the topic of patent
trolls, entities that patent obscure things in order to sue other companies for a profit.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
There is an important distinction between the notions of invention and innovation that
is often overlooked in the scholarly literature and popular media. Properly understood, in
the context of patent law, invention refers to the act of conceiving the design for a new
and non-obvious technological product or process.Although innovation includes the act
of invention, it is not so limited; rather, innovation encompasses the entire process of
identifying a problem to solved; conceiving a solution to the problem; identifying a
market; building a prototype; testing the prototype; making a commercial product
embodying the invention; marketing, selling, and distributing the product; and improving
upon that product. Strictly speaking, patent laws provide direct incentives to invent, but
not generally to innovate.
Yet, there are numerous instances involving significant inventor commercializes
transaction costs, which can stifle commercialization. First, non practicing entities
(NPEs)namely, firms that do not commercialize their patented inventions and perform
little to no R&Dare often termed patent trolls, because they tend to exploit litigation
and licensing market defects to extract unwarranted rents from commercializers, usually
on patents that the commercializer was completely unaware of before the NPEs
demand for payment.
Thus, on Kitchs view, the patent system would produce greater levels of
commercialization if patents were granted even earlier in the innovation processand
with much broader claimsthan warranted under the reward theory. Doing so would

insure against commercialization risk and eliminate duplicated costs, promoting the
investment needed to make and sell products in the marketplace.

Source 3:
Citation (MLA): Kitch, Edmund W. "The nature and function of the patent system." T
he Journal
of law & economics

20.2 (1977): 265-275.

Source Validation: This was written by a law professor of the University of Chicago and it was
published in the Journal of Law and Economics, which is a reputable journal from the University
of Chicago.
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of patents and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source goes into quite a bit of more
depth about the patent system than the previous 2 publications that I read. It more clearly
defined what a patent system exactly is and what it is intended to do. One thing that it went into
a lot more depth was the reward theory, which basically states that entrepreneurs and inventors
are incentivized to patent ideas and innovate because of security. They essentially have the
sole legal rights to use the idea for their benefit, before giving up the idea to the free market.
Another thing that this publication discussed were the upper and lower boundaries of a patent,
or basically the extent to which your patent secures your idea. It also talked about the time-bar
rule of a patent in America, which basically states that a patent is invalid if the application is filed
more than one year after a commercial use.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
We tend to think of an invention as the thing an inventor has made or accomplished,
and the rule seems to imply the inventor is confined to that. But the rule is misleading,
because the invention as claimed in the patent claims and the physical embodiment of
the invention are two quite different things. "A claim is an abstraction and generalization
of an indefinitely large number of concrete, physical objects."" Thus to illustrate from a
nineteenth-century case, an inventor could claim a process of separating fats into
glycerine and stearic, margaric and oleic acids through the use of heat, pressure, and
water at any temperature and in any apparatus that would work.12
In the American system, the patent is awarded to the first inventor, a technical status
almost always obtained by the first to file. The patent application need not disclose a
device or process of any commercial value, only a version of the invention that will work.

The combined effect of these rules is that whenever a technological innovation has
been discovered, it is risky not to immediately seek a patent even though the practical
significance of the innovation may be but dimly perceived

Source 4:
Citation (MLA): Mansfield, Edwin. "Patents and innovation: an empirical study." M
anagement
science

32.2 (1986): 173-181.

Source Validation: This was written by a reputable economics professor at the University of
Pennsylvania and published in M
anagement Science, which is a generally good source.
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of patents and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source was quite different than the
other publications that I read. The basic assertion was through a series of surveys and looking
at empirical data, the authors of the publication found that patents do not necessarily increase
the rate of innovation, which I found to be an interesting find. They stated that in most industries,
such as motor vehicles, rubber, textiles, patenting their assets did not actually increase the rate
of innovation. Hence, the reward theory that was discussed about in Source 3 was proven to be
incorrect. However, they did note that certain industries, mainly pharmaceuticals and chemicals,
benefited intensively from the usage of patents and the rate of new chemical discovery actually
did increase.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
The percentage of inventions that is patented can vary over time as well as among
industries and firms. According to one influential hypothesis, this percentage has tended
to decline over the past decade or two, as firms have become more disillusioned with the
patent system and as they have devised other ways of protecting their technology that
are more cost-effective than patents.
To understand better why so many of the firms increased the percentage of inventions
patented, we chose a random sample of the firms that reported such an increase, and
asked them why it had occurred. The most frequently-cited reason was that the firm's
product mix had changed; there was a shift toward more sophisticated product lines
where inventions are more likely to be patented.

In most of the industries included here, there is a positive correlation between a firm's
size (measured by 1982 sales) and the percentage of its patentable inventions that were
patented. In each of the three industries (pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and petroleum)

where patents seem to be most important, this correlation is statistically significant.I3

Apparently, the very large firms in these industries tend to be even more convinced than
their smaller rivals that patent protection is worthwhile.

Source 5:
Citation (MLA): Kingston, William. "Innovation needs patents reform." R
esearch Policy

30.3
(2001): 403-423.
Source Validation: This was written by William Kingston, a reputable professor from Trinity
College in Ireland.
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of patents and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source discusses the role of
innovation in the patent system and how over the past few years and decade, the explosion of
the software industry has led to massive influxes in patent applications and the PTO is unable to
deal with the overflow. The source also discusses the differences between the various types of
intellectual property like copyrights, trademarks, and others. In addition, the differences between
tacit and explicit knowledge is discussed, which is essential to filing a patent of any sort. The
prospect theory is also talked about in this source. Like other sources that I read, it expands
upon the idea that patents help to provide an incentive for inventors to innovate.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
Roycroft and Kash define a complex technology as: a process or product that cannot be
understood in full detail by an individual expert sufficiently to communicate all details of
the process or product across time and distance to other experts. A simple product or
process is one that can be understood or communicated by one individual .
Among the contributory factors have been the explosion of software and the use of
copyright and patents to protect it; the growth of biotechnology and the patentability of its
inventions; the development of electronic databases and arrangements for protecting
investment in them...
As might be expected, the failure of the patent system to protect inventions in certain
areas has led to use of alternative arrangements to try to fill the gaps. The most striking
illustration of this is computer programs. When patent protection was sought for the
earliest of these, it was denied by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, not on strict
legal grounds, but simply because the Office did not have the resources to cope with the
volume of applications it envisaged would follow.

Source 6:
Citation (MLA): Moser, Petra. "Patents and innovation: Evidence from economic history." T
he
Journal of Economic Perspectives

27.1 (2013): 23-44.

Source Validation: This was written by David H. Autor, a professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of patents and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source, specifically the one chapter
that I read, discusses the historical background of patents and their effects on innovation.
Basically, it was a study to see if intellectual security measures, like patents, can have a positive
effect on innovation and new product creation and it showed a positive correlation. Some
historical examples included the Venetian Republic granting patents in the 15th century and
Great Britain granting monopolies in the 17th century in order to encourage people to innovate.
The source also discussed the recent influx of plant patents and how that has affected the entire
system. For example, the example given was on the topic of roses and how companies filed
patents for various hybrids of roses.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
In the most basic theoretical models, patents pose a tradeoff between the social benefit
from stronger incentives for invention and ts from stronger incentives for invention and
losses in consumer welfare as a result of monopoly pricing
Patent data may, however, fail to capture innovation that occurs atent data may,
however, fail to capture innovation that occurs outside of the patent systemfor
example, in countries without patent laws or in industries in atent systemfor example,
in countries without patent laws or in industries in which inventors rely on alternative
mechanisms to protect their intellectual property inventors rely on alternative
mechanisms to protect their intellectual property.
Historical eventsincluding a series of prominent technology exhibition - have created
rich archival records on innovation within ich archival records on innovation within and
outside of the patent system, which of the patent system, which offer opportunities to
measure the share and the characteristics of innovations ffer opportunities to measure
the share and the characteristics of innovations that occur outside of the patent system.

Source 7:
Citation (MLA): Chesbrough, Henry, and Adrienne Kardon Crowther. "Beyond high tech: early
adopters of open innovation in other industries." R
&d Management

36.3 (2006): 229-236.

Source Validation: This was written by professors who work at UC Berkeley, Haas Business
School, a renowned college for business
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about patents
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of innovation and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source discusses in depth, how
open innovation applies to industries other than high-technology. The two professors, Henry
Chesbrough and Adrienne Kardon Crowther, conducted an experiment to see whether open
innovation actually applies to other industries. They created a questionnaire that tries to see
where they are gathering their R&D research from and correlating that with the type of industry
they belong to. Their findings announced that there were indeed many companies who
employed techniques of open innovation. In particular, companies seemed to use technology
in-licensing, acquisition, and joint development. However, there were some concepts that were
not employed heavily compared to others, including outbound open innovation.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
Once a business group has identified a new product innovation or market segment it
wants to pursue, it is often faster and cheaper to look outside for the associated
technology than to develop it in-house (Director, Consumer R&D, Diversified Mfg Co.).
Companies using open innovation to extend their enterprise do not create new
processes and metrics; instead they layer an open innovation perspective onto existing
processes. In general, open innovation is considered a means to an end or a tool to
achieve growth goals.
. All of the respondents we spoke with engage in some form of technology in-licensing,
acquisition and joint development to bring in technology. A number also engage in
outbound activities such as intellectual property or brand out-licensing.

Source 8:
Citation (MLA): Archibugi, Daniele, and Giorgio Sirilli. "The direct measurement of
technological innovation in business." I NTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE on INNOVATION AND
ENTERPRISE: STATISTICS AND INDICATORS

. 2000.
Source Validation: This was written by the chair of the department of Trade and Industry in the
United Kingdom
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about
innovation
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of innovation and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source is a little different from the
previous ones that I researched, in that it discusses the ways to directly measure innovation in
business. The source compares the differences between patents and R&D and examines the
strengths and weaknesses of each. Some of the strengths of patents include the ability to
compare their innovations across the world and have regular data collection. Some of the
weaknesses of R&D include the fact that it generally excludes design and underestimates
innovation in small firms. The source also discusses the different methods of measuring
innovation, including the subject approach and the object approach. The subject approach
means that firms have to answer qualitative and quantitative questions about their innovations
and people can analyze those results. The object approach collects information on single
innovations through various surveys that firms are given and then analyzed.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
OECD estimates show that service industries now perform in most countries almost a
fourth of total business R&D (24.8% in 1991 compared to a share of 4.2% in 1981).
The main problems linked to the measurement of innovation in services revolve
basically around three issues: the distinction between product and process, the items to
be considered in the cost of innovation, the economic impact of innovation (Evangelista
and Sirilli, 1995).
The widespread belief that the so-called new economy is based on knowledge and
learning (Archibugi and Lundvall, 2000) will certainly increase the pressure for reliable
and informative indicators of technological innovation. But one of the key characteristics
of the learning economy is precisely that it changes the ways in which knowledge is
generated and introduced into economic life.

Source 9:
Citation (MLA): Bassett-Jones, Nigel. "The paradox of diversity management, creativity and
innovation." Creativity and innovation management

14.2 (2005): 169-175.

Source Validation: This was written by Nigel Bassett-Jones, a lecturer at Oxford Brookes
University
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about
innovation
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of innovation and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source is rather different than the
previous ones that I had in that this source is more about creativity and diversity in a company.
Essentially, companies want to create a workplace with diverse people. But this does not
necessarily limit the company to race as the deciding factor. Instead, the HR team must look
intellectual capability, cultural background, and even personality. This entire field is termed
diversity management and is very important to the success of a company. The role of human
resources in a company is to create teams and diverse groups of people that are able to fulfill
the various stages of innovation. The source then follows on to discuss the role of creativity in
innovation. It attempts to highlight the different relationships between creativity, innovation,
diversity, and competitive advantage. This source was very different in that it wasnt as technical
as the others.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
It is difficult to separate process from product because products can be intangible, and
processes often result in the creation of product. There is, however, considerable
consensus around what constitutes a creative product. King and Anderson (1995) define
its key characteristic as novelty, i.e. the conception must differ significantly from what
has gone before.
The closer the concept comes to the marketplace, however, the greater the number of
people involved. This results in the emergence of two distinct types of challenge
technical and human. Technical problems require the creative energy of teams, whilst
human problems arise because of the need to promote diffusion and buy-in to the new
idea, initially across the organization and sometimes across the supply chain.
For the purposes of this papers argument, the term diversity encompasses a range of
differences in ethnicity/nationality, gender, function, ability, language, religion, lifestyle or

tenure. Additionally, diversity in the workplace includes more than employees diverse
demographic backgrounds, and takes in differences in culture and intellectual capability.

Source 10:
Citation (MLA): Pearce, Craig L., and Michael D. Ensley. "A reciprocal and longitudinal
investigation of the innovation process: The central role of shared vision in product and process
innovation teams (PPITs)." Journal of Organizational Behavior

25.2 (2004): 259-278.

Source Validation: This was written by the Aalborg University Centre for Industrial Production
in Denmark
How did you find this source: I used Google Scholar to search up publications about
innovation
Intended Audience: Looking at the word choices of the publication, the most likely audience is
people who are already familiar with the topic of innovation and people of academia and
professors.
What arguments/topics does this source discuss?: T
his source further discusses the
various types of innovation in the industry, like how the previous sources discussed open
innovation and user innovation. Specifically, the paper goes through three different types of
innovation: product innovation, process innovation, and organizational innovation. Product
innovation is pretty self-explanatory; its the process of creating or improving upon a physical
product. Process innovation is innovation of the creation of a product itself. Its most noticeable
in industries like manufacturing. Last but not least, organizational innovation is innovation in the
way that companies are structured. A great example is Google, where there is actually a very
small hierarchy between staff and for the most part, engineers and managers have similar
power and position in Google. The source then goes on to describe and expand upon different
roles in the innovation process, like the ambassador and problem solver and project lead.
Finally, theres a very useful diagram near the end that explains the model of innovation.
Minimum 3 quotes, paraphrases, summaries of source text that seem likely to be helpful in
future writing:
The six propositions suggest that the success of innovation processes depends on the
fit between: the required characteristics of both the people conducting the process
(prop. 4) and the way their contribution is organized (prop. 2), which are derived from the
characteristics (prop. 2) and the dynamics (prop. 3) of the process, and the type (prop. 3)
of innovation involved,
problem solver - solves the PMTO-aspects of the innovation; usually this role involves
various people, specialized in product development, marketing or production engineering
or in the case of organizational innovation, with an HRM or managerial backgro
Innovation processes are characterized by certain levels of uncertainty, complexity, and
diversity, and interdependence. The success of innovation depends on the extent to

which the innovation manager is able to fit the organization of the process to the
demands created by these characteristics.