专利维持制度及实证研究
|
摘要
专利维持制度是专利制度促进创新的重要机制之一。研究专利维持制度对提升创新主体运用和管理专利能力,提高专利制度运行绩效和我国国家知识产权战略实施效果具有重要意义。本文通过研究专利维持制度及其实证分析,得出如下结论。
首先,专利维持制度是专利制度的核心机制,它与专利制度中的其他制度构成有机整体,共同推动专利制度正常运行。专利制度目的的实现必须以专利维持制度为依托。专利制度中现有技术和创造性标准、专利维持年费和侵权赔偿等制度对专利维持制度具有重要影响。从平衡专利权人个体利益与社会公共利益的功能来看,专利维持制度是一项公共政策；而从专利权人自身利益角度来看,专利维持制度是平衡专利成本与收益的重要工具。
其次,专利维持时间不仅反映专利制度的运行绩效,也反映专利质量的高低；影响其变化的因素繁多且庞杂。达到最优维持时间的专利数占授权专利总数的比例是衡量专利制度运行绩效的重要指标；专利维持时间反映了专利质量,用专利维持时间评价专利质量是一种相对较好的方法,但因专利质量内涵的模糊性和评价指标的复杂性,运用专利维持时间评价专利质量会产生一定的误差；专利维持时间受专利制度中其他制度、专利技术及相关信息、专利管理水平、技术交易制度、政府资助政策等因素的影响。
再次,专利维持年费制度是调整专利维持时间、完善专利维持制度、提高专利制度运行绩效的重要机制。专利维持年费制度通过增加专利维持成本,影响专利维持时间,平衡专利权人和社会公众之间的利益。美日欧及我国专利维持年费制度的特点对专利维持制度的影响各异。专利局实行自负盈亏财政制度时,专利维持年费制度对专利制度的支撑作用可能会背离“提高专利制度绩效和促进技术创新”的初衷。
最后,实证研究表明,我国国家知识产权局授权专利的维持时间较短,因未交维持年费被终止的专利数量较多,且被终止的速度快。就专利信息而言,申请人国别、审查时间、权利主体类型、发明人数和权利要求数对专利维持时间的影响程度依次减弱。从创新主体的类型来看,工矿企业专利维持时间最长,个人次之,科研院所专利维持时间最短。从技术领域来看,电学类专利维持时间最长,次之是物理类、作业和运输类,第三是生活需要类和机械工程、照明、加热、武器、爆破类,第四是化学和冶金类及固定建筑物类,纺织和造纸类专利维持时间最短。从权利人国别看,国外权利人拥有的专利比国内权利人拥有的专利维持时间明显较长。
The patent maintenance system is an important mechanism to promote innovation of the patent system. Research of the patent maintenance system is of great significance for the enhancement of the capacity to run and manage patent of innovation subjects and the improvement of patent system performance and the implementation effect of the National Intellectual Property Strategy. By the theoretical and empirical research of the patent maintenance system, this dissertation concludes as follows.
First of all, the patent maintenance system is one of the core parts of the patent system, together with the other parts, composing an organic system of the patent system and powering it to function normally. The achievements of the ultimate purpose of the patent system depend on effective practice of the patent maintenance system. The judgment of prior art and inventiveness standard, the patent maintenance annual fee system, and the tort reparation system all exert an important influence on the patent maintenance system. From the perspective of balancing individual interests and public interest, the patent maintenance system is a public policy. While from the patentees' interest view, the patent maintenance system is a tool to balance the costs and the benefits of patent.
Secondly, the patent maintenance time reflects the performance of the patent system and the patent quality as well. The factors affecting the patent maintenance time are numerous and heterogeneous. The proportion of the amount of patents of maintenance time to reach its optimal maintenance time among all granted patents is an important indicator to measure the level of the patent system performance. The patent maintenance time to some extent reflects the patent quality, therefore can be considered as relatively a better indicator of the patent quality than other ways. However, because of the ambiguity of the patent quality content and the complexity of the evaluation indicator, there are some errors to evaluating the patent quality by the patent maintenance time. The patent maintenance times is affected by some factors including other systems of the patent system, the technologies, the patent management levels, the technical trading systems, the government-funding policies etc.
Thirdly, the patent maintenance annual fee system is an important mechanism to adjust the patent maintenance time, perfect patent maintenance system, and to improve the patent system performance. The patent maintenance annual fee system influences the patent maintenance time by increasing the patent maintenance cost and thus balances the patentee's interests and the public interests. The patent maintenance annual fee systems of the United States, Japan, Europe and China have their respective characteristics. When the self-funding financial policy is implemented in the patent offices, the supportive role of the patent maintenance system for patent system may deviate from its original purpose to improve the patent system performance and to promote technological innovation.
Finally, the empirical study shows that the average maintenance time of the patents granted by the State Intellectual Property Office of the P.R.C is short, the amount of patents terminated by unpaid fee is large, and the terminating speed is high. From the patent information perspective, influences of the applicant's country, the examination time, types of patentees, the number of inventor and the number of claims on the paten maintenance time declines progressively. In terms of innovation subject types, the patent maintenance times of enterprises are the longest, followed by individuals, institutes and universities. From the view of technological fields, the patent maintenance time of Electricity is the longest, followed in turn by the Physics'and the Performing operations' and the Transporting; the Human necessities and the Mechanical engineering, Lighting, Heating, Weapons, Blasting; the Chemistry and Metallurgy, the Fixed constructions; the Textiles and Paper. From the perspective of patentees'nationalities, the maintenance time of the patents from foreigners is obviously longer than domestic patents'.
首先,专利维持制度是专利制度的核心机制,它与专利制度中的其他制度构成有机整体,共同推动专利制度正常运行。专利制度目的的实现必须以专利维持制度为依托。专利制度中现有技术和创造性标准、专利维持年费和侵权赔偿等制度对专利维持制度具有重要影响。从平衡专利权人个体利益与社会公共利益的功能来看,专利维持制度是一项公共政策；而从专利权人自身利益角度来看,专利维持制度是平衡专利成本与收益的重要工具。
其次,专利维持时间不仅反映专利制度的运行绩效,也反映专利质量的高低；影响其变化的因素繁多且庞杂。达到最优维持时间的专利数占授权专利总数的比例是衡量专利制度运行绩效的重要指标；专利维持时间反映了专利质量,用专利维持时间评价专利质量是一种相对较好的方法,但因专利质量内涵的模糊性和评价指标的复杂性,运用专利维持时间评价专利质量会产生一定的误差；专利维持时间受专利制度中其他制度、专利技术及相关信息、专利管理水平、技术交易制度、政府资助政策等因素的影响。
再次,专利维持年费制度是调整专利维持时间、完善专利维持制度、提高专利制度运行绩效的重要机制。专利维持年费制度通过增加专利维持成本,影响专利维持时间,平衡专利权人和社会公众之间的利益。美日欧及我国专利维持年费制度的特点对专利维持制度的影响各异。专利局实行自负盈亏财政制度时,专利维持年费制度对专利制度的支撑作用可能会背离“提高专利制度绩效和促进技术创新”的初衷。
最后,实证研究表明,我国国家知识产权局授权专利的维持时间较短,因未交维持年费被终止的专利数量较多,且被终止的速度快。就专利信息而言,申请人国别、审查时间、权利主体类型、发明人数和权利要求数对专利维持时间的影响程度依次减弱。从创新主体的类型来看,工矿企业专利维持时间最长,个人次之,科研院所专利维持时间最短。从技术领域来看,电学类专利维持时间最长,次之是物理类、作业和运输类,第三是生活需要类和机械工程、照明、加热、武器、爆破类,第四是化学和冶金类及固定建筑物类,纺织和造纸类专利维持时间最短。从权利人国别看,国外权利人拥有的专利比国内权利人拥有的专利维持时间明显较长。
The patent maintenance system is an important mechanism to promote innovation of the patent system. Research of the patent maintenance system is of great significance for the enhancement of the capacity to run and manage patent of innovation subjects and the improvement of patent system performance and the implementation effect of the National Intellectual Property Strategy. By the theoretical and empirical research of the patent maintenance system, this dissertation concludes as follows.
First of all, the patent maintenance system is one of the core parts of the patent system, together with the other parts, composing an organic system of the patent system and powering it to function normally. The achievements of the ultimate purpose of the patent system depend on effective practice of the patent maintenance system. The judgment of prior art and inventiveness standard, the patent maintenance annual fee system, and the tort reparation system all exert an important influence on the patent maintenance system. From the perspective of balancing individual interests and public interest, the patent maintenance system is a public policy. While from the patentees' interest view, the patent maintenance system is a tool to balance the costs and the benefits of patent.
Secondly, the patent maintenance time reflects the performance of the patent system and the patent quality as well. The factors affecting the patent maintenance time are numerous and heterogeneous. The proportion of the amount of patents of maintenance time to reach its optimal maintenance time among all granted patents is an important indicator to measure the level of the patent system performance. The patent maintenance time to some extent reflects the patent quality, therefore can be considered as relatively a better indicator of the patent quality than other ways. However, because of the ambiguity of the patent quality content and the complexity of the evaluation indicator, there are some errors to evaluating the patent quality by the patent maintenance time. The patent maintenance times is affected by some factors including other systems of the patent system, the technologies, the patent management levels, the technical trading systems, the government-funding policies etc.
Thirdly, the patent maintenance annual fee system is an important mechanism to adjust the patent maintenance time, perfect patent maintenance system, and to improve the patent system performance. The patent maintenance annual fee system influences the patent maintenance time by increasing the patent maintenance cost and thus balances the patentee's interests and the public interests. The patent maintenance annual fee systems of the United States, Japan, Europe and China have their respective characteristics. When the self-funding financial policy is implemented in the patent offices, the supportive role of the patent maintenance system for patent system may deviate from its original purpose to improve the patent system performance and to promote technological innovation.
Finally, the empirical study shows that the average maintenance time of the patents granted by the State Intellectual Property Office of the P.R.C is short, the amount of patents terminated by unpaid fee is large, and the terminating speed is high. From the patent information perspective, influences of the applicant's country, the examination time, types of patentees, the number of inventor and the number of claims on the paten maintenance time declines progressively. In terms of innovation subject types, the patent maintenance times of enterprises are the longest, followed by individuals, institutes and universities. From the view of technological fields, the patent maintenance time of Electricity is the longest, followed in turn by the Physics'and the Performing operations' and the Transporting; the Human necessities and the Mechanical engineering, Lighting, Heating, Weapons, Blasting; the Chemistry and Metallurgy, the Fixed constructions; the Textiles and Paper. From the perspective of patentees'nationalities, the maintenance time of the patents from foreigners is obviously longer than domestic patents'.
引文
1参见国家知识产权局网站http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo2008/yw/2009/200912/t20091218_485670.html 2009-12-19
1参见国家知识产权局网站[DB/OL]http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo2008/yw/2009/200912/t20091218_485670.html 2009-12-19
1 World Intellectual Property Indicators, (2009 Edition). [DB/OL] http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/pdf/wipo_pub_941.pdf 2009-12-21
[1]Acs, A.J., and Audretsch, D.B. Innovation in Large and Small Firms:An Empirical Analysis. American Economic Review,1988,78(4):678-690
[2]Acs, Z.J. Anselin, L., Varga, A. Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production on New knowledge. Research Policy,2002,31(7):1069-1085
[3]Albert, D., Avery, P., McAllister and Narin, F. Direct Validation of Citation Counts as Indicators of Industrially Important Patents. Research Policy,1991, 20(3):251-259
[4]Alcacer, J., and Gittelman, M. Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations, the Review of Economics and Statistics, 2006,88(4),774-779
[5]Azoulay, P., Ding, W., Stuart, T. The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2007.63(4):599-623
[6]Baker, S., Lichtman, D. and Mezzetti, C. Disclosure and Investment as Strategies in the Patent Race, Journal of Law and Economics 2005,48:173-194
[7]Balkin, D.B. Markman, G.D. and Gomez-Mejia, L. Is CEO Pay in High-technology Firms Related to Innovation? Academy of Management Journal. 2000,43(6):1118-1129
[8]Baudry, M., Dumont, B. Patent Renewals as Options:Improving the Mechanisms for Weeding out Lousy Patents. Review of Industrial Organization,2006,28 (1): 41-62
[9]Bessen, J. The Value of U.S. Patents by Owner and Patent Characteristics, Research Policy,2008,37 (5):932-945
[10]Bottazzi, L., M. Da Rin and Hellmann, T. The Changing Face of the European Venture Capital Industry:Facts and Analysis', Journal of Private Equity,2004,8(1). http://www.insme.org/documenti/SEVeCa-SumReport.pdf
[11]Brcitzman and Narin, F. A Case for Patent Citation Analysis in Litigation. The law Works,1996.3
[12]Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. and Malerba, F. The Empirical Assessment of Firms' Technological Coherence:Data and Methodology, in The Economics and Management of Technological Diversification, J. Cantwell, A. Gambardella and 0. Granstrand (eds.), Routledge, London.2004
[13]Bulut, H. and Moschini, G Patents, Trade Secrets and the Correlation among R&D Projects, Economics Letters 2006,91(1):131-137
[14]Caballero, R. and Jaffe, A.M. How High are the Giants'Shoulders:An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth. In O. Blanchard and S. Fischer, eds., National Bureau of Economic Research Macroeconomics Annual,1993.8:15-74 MIT Press
[15]Candal, and Scotchmer, S. Coordinating Research through Research Joint Ventures. Journal of Public Economics,1993,51(2):173-193
[16]Carpenter, Narin, F. and Woolf, P. Citation Rates to Technologically Important Patents. World Patent Information,1981,3(4):160-163
[17]Chang, H.F. Patent Scope, Antitrust Policy and Cumulative Innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics,1995,26 (Spring),34-57
[18]Cheong, I. Invent or Develop? On Sequential Innovation and Patent Policy. Mimeograph, Department of Economics, Princeton University.1994
[19]Chou, T. and Haller, H. The Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation Reconsidered.1995, Working Paper E95-02, Department of Economics, VPI & State University
[20]Chu A. Effects of Blocking Patents on R&D:a Quantitative DGE Analysis. Journal of Economic Growth,2009,14(1):55-78
[21]CIPO. Intellectual Property-innovation on a Global Scale. Annual Repot 2001-02, 2
[22]Clark, M., Berven, H. The Face of the Patent is not the "Whole Story": Determining Effective Life of a Pharmaceutical Patent in the United States. World Patent Information,2004,26(4):283-295
[23]Cool, K., Roller, L.H., and Leleux, B. The Relative Impact of Actual and Potential Rivalry on Firm Profitability in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(1):1-14
[24]Cornelli, F. and Schankerman, M. Optimal Patent Renewals. LSE STICERD Research Paper No. EI13. January 1996. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1158292
[25]Cornelli, F. and Schankerman, M. Patent Renewals and R&D Inventive. RAND Journal of Economics,1999,30(2):197-213
[26]Crampes, C. and Langinier, C. Information Disclosure in the Renewal of Patents. Annalisa d'Economie et de Statistique,1998,49/50,262-288
[27]Cremer, J. and Scotchmer, S. Optimal R&D Procurement:Why Patents? Mimeo, University of California Berkeley,1996
[28]Dechenaux, E., M., Thursby and Thursby, J. Shirking, Sharing Risk and Shelving: The Role of University License Contracts, Discussion paper, Ken State University. 2007
[29]Deng, Y. A Dynamic Stochastic Analysis of International Patent Application and Renewal Processes.2006. Working paper, Southern Methodist University
[30]Deng, Y. Renewal Study of European Patents:A Three-country Comparison, Southern Methodist University of Dallas.2005, Working Paper
[31]Deng, Y. Private Value of European Patents. European Economic Review, 2007,51(7):1785-1812
[32]Duguet, E. and lung, N. R&D Investment, Patent Life and Patent Value, Institute National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques, Malakoff Cedex.1997, working paper No. G 9705
[33]Eaton, J. Kortum, S. Lerner, J. International Patenting and the European Patent Office:A Quantitative.2003. http://www.nber.org/CRIW/papers/eaton.pdf
[34]Emstholger. Patent Information for Strategic Technology Management. World Patent Information,2003,25 (3):233-242
[35]Espina, M.I. To Renew or not to Renew:An Empirical Study of Patent Valuation and Maintenance by the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, PhD,2003
[36]Evenson, R. International Invention:Implications for Technology Market Analysis' in Z. Griliches (ed.) R&D, Patents and Productivity, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.1984
[37]Fikkert, B., and Luthria, M. Intellectual Property Rights in a Developing Country: Estimates of the Private Value of Patent Protection in India. Mimeo.2000
[38]Futagami K, Iwaisako, T. Dynamic Analysis of Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model. Journal of Economic Theory,2007,132(1):306-334
[39]Gans, J.S., King, S. P and Lampe, R. Patent Renewal Fees and Self-Funding Patent Offices. The B.E. Journals in Theoretical Economics,2004,4(1):1-16
[40]Geuna, A., Nesta, and L.J.J. University Patenting and its Effects on Academic Research:The Emerging European Evidence. Research Policy,2006,35(6): 790-807
[41]Gilbert, R., and Shapiro, C. Optimal Patent Length and Breadth. The Rand Journal of Economics,1990,21(1) 106-112
[42]Gompers, P., and Lerner, J. The Venture Capital Revolution. Journal of Economic Perspective,2001,15(2):145-168
[43]Goto, A., Honjyo, N., Suzuki, K. and Takinozawa, M. Economic Analysis of Research and Development and Technological Progress. (in Japanese) Economic Analysis.1986:103
[44]Green, J. and Scotchmer, S. On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics,1995,26 (Spring):20-33
[45]Griliches, A. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28:1661-1701
[46]Griliches, Z. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey', Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28(4):1661-1707
[47]Griliches, Z. Patents:Recent Trends and Puzzles. Brookings Papers: Microeconomics,1989:291-319
[48]Griliches, Z., Hall, B.H. and Pakes, A. The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity', in Dasqupta, P. and P. Stoneman (eds), Economic Policy and Technological Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.1987
[49]Gronqvist, C. The Private Value of Patents by Patent Characteristics:Evidence from Finland. J Technol Transf,2009,34(2):159-168
[50]Hall, B. H. and MacGarvie, M. The Private Value of Software Patents.2006, NBER working paper 12195
[51]Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., and Trajtenberg, M. Market Value and Patent Citations. The Rand Journal of Economics,2005,36(1):16-38
[52]Hall, B., Jaff. A. and Trajtenberg, M. Market Value and Patent Citations:A First Look, National Bureau of Economic Research.2000, Working Paper No.7741
[53]Hall, B., Trajtenberg, M., and Jaffe, A.B. The Patent Citations Data File:Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools.2001, NBER Working Paper 8498
[54]Hall, B.H., Thoma, G, Torrisi, S. The Market Value of Patents and R&D:Evidence from European firms.2007, NBER Working Paper No.13426
[55]Harhoff, D. Patent Constructionism:Exploring the Microstructure of Patent Portfolios, Presentation Prepared for the EPO/OECD Conference on Patent Statistics for Policy Decision Making, Vienna,2006,10(3):23-24
[56]Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F., Vopel, K. Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions. The Review of Economics and Statistics.1999,81 (3): 511-515
[57]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M. and Vopel, K. Exploring the Tail of Patent Value Distributions.'Mimeo. Harvard University,1997
[58]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., and Vopel, K. Exploring the Tail of Patented Invention Value Distribution. In O. Granstrand (Ed.), Economics, law and intellectual property:Seeking strategies for research and teaching in a developing field. Kluwer Academic Publishers,2003
[59]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F., Vopel, K. Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights. Research Policy.2003,32 (8):1343-1363
[60]Hartwick, J. M. Patent Race Optimal with Respect to Entry.International Journal of Industrial Organization,1991(9):197-207
[61]Heller, M. A., and Eisenberg, R. S. Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommunism in Biomedical Research, Science,1998:280(5),698-701
[62]Hellmann, T. and Puri, M. Venture Capital and the Professionalization of Start-Up Firms:Empirical Evidence, Journal of Finance,2002,57(1):169-97
[63]Hitt, M. A., Dixon, R.D., Hoskisson, R.E. and Kochhar, R. Corporate Entrepreneurship and Cross-functional Fertilization:Activation, Process, and Disintegration of New Product Design Team. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,1991,23(3):145-167
[64]Holthausen, R.W., Larker, D.R., and Sloan, R.G Business Unit Innovation and the Structure of Executive Eompensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1995, 19(2-3):279-313
[65]Horstmann, J., MacDonald, G. and Slivinski, A. Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms:To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent. Journal of Political Economy, 1985,93(5):837-58
[66]Reitzig M. What Determines Patent Value? Insights from the Semiconductor industry. Research Policy.2003,32(11):13-26
[67]Reitzig, M. Improving Patent Valuations for Management Purposes-validating New Indicators by Analyzing Application Rationales. Research Policy,2004,33, (6-7):939-957
[68]Rossman, J. and B.S. Sanders. The Patent Utilization Study, Patent, Trademark and Copyright. Journal of Research and Education,1957,7(1):74-111
[69]Sapsalis, E. and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, The Institutional Sources of Knowledge and the Value of Academic Patents, Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2007,16(2):139-157
[70]Schankerman, M. and Pakes, A. Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period. The Economic Journal,1986, 96(12):1052-1076
[71]Schankerman, M. How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field. RAND Journal of Economics,1998,29(1):77-107
[72]Schankerman, M. Strategies to Improve Patenting and Enforcement, IPKat,29 May 2008. Consulted on June 1,2008
[73]Scherer, F. M., and Harhoff, D. Technology Policy for a World of Skew-distributed Outcomes. Research Policy,2000,29(4):559-566
[74]Schmitz, J.A. On the Breadth of Patent Protection. Mimeograph, State University of New York at Stony Brook.1989
[75]Schmookler, J. Invention and Economic Growth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.1966
[76]Scotchmer, S. On the Optimality of the Patent Renewal System. RAND Journal of Economics, (1999)30(2):181-196
[77]Scotchmer, S. Protecting Early Innovators:Should Second Generation Products be Patentable? The Rand Journal of Economics,1996,27(2) 117-126
[78]Scotchmer, S. Standing on the Shoulders of Giants:Cumulative Research and the Patent Law, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Symposium on Intellectual Property Law,1991,5(1):29-41
[79]Sullivan, R. J. Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in Britain and Ireland: 1852-1876. Economics,1994,61(2):37-58
[80]Svensson, R. Commercialization of Patents and External Financing during the R&D-Phase. Research Policy,2007,36(7):1052-69
[81]Svensson, R. Licensing or Acquiring Patents? Evidence from Patent Renewal Data. Research Institute of Industrial Economics,2008, Working Paper 13938. http://www.nber.org/papers/w13938.pdf
[82]Thomas, P. The Effect of Technological Impact upon Patent Renewal Decisions. Technology Analysis &Strategic Management,1999,11(2):181-197
[83]Thursby J. Fuller A.W. and Thursby M. US Faculty Patenting:Inside and Outside the University, Research Policy.2009,38(1):14-25
[84]Tong, X., Frame J.D. Measuring National Technological Performance with Patent Claims Data. Research Policy,1994,23(2):133-142
[85]Trajtenber, M. A Penny for Your Quotes:Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics,1990,21(1):172-187
[86]Trajtenberg, M. Innovation in Israel 1968-1997:A Comparative Analysis Using Patent Data. Research Policy,2001,30(3):363-389
[87]Trajtenberg, M., Jaffe, A. and Henderson, R. University versus Corporate Patents: A Window on the Basicness of Invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,1997,5(1):19-50
[88]Van Dijk, T. Patent Height and Competition in Product Improvements. Journal of Industrial Economics,1996,44(2):151-167
[89]Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. and D. Francois, The Cost Factor in Patent Systems, Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, in Press.2006, DOI 10.1007/s10842-008-0033-2
[90]Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. and N. van Zeebroeck, A Brief History of Space and Time:the Scope-Year Index as a Patent Value Indicator Based on Families and Renewals, Scientometrics,2008,75(2):319-338
[91]Van Zeebroeck, N. and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Filing Strategies and Patent Value,2008, CEPR Working Paper 6821
[92]Van Zeebroeck, N., B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie and D. Guellec, Claiming more:the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants. Research Policy,2009,38 (6):1006-1020
[93]Van Zeebroeck, N., B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, W. Han, Issues in Measuring the Degree of Technological Specialization with Patent Data, Scientometrics,2006, Vol.66 (3):481-492
[94]Wagner, P. R. and Strandburg, K. J. The Obviousness Requirement in the Patent Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review,2007,155(2):96
[95]Webster, E., Palangkaraya, A. and Jensen, P. Characteristics of International Patent Application Outcomes, Economics Letters,2007,95 (3):362-368
[96]White, N. L. Time Waits for no Man:Deciding when to File a Patent Application in Europe. Nat. Biotechnol.2007,25 (6):639-641
[97]William H. Brown, Trends in Patent Renewals at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. World Patent Information,1995,17(4):225-234
[98]Wright, B. The Economics of Invention Incentives:Patents, Prizes and Research Contracts. American Economic Review,1983,73(4):691-707
[99]陈云伟,杨志萍,方曙等.基于发明专利现状的我国技术创新能力分析.科技管理研究,2007(6)：9-12
[100]高山行,郭华涛.中国专利权质量估计及分析.管理工程学报,2002(3)：66-68
[101]国家知识产权局规划发展司.2007年上半年专利申请与授权状况综述.专利统计简报,2007(10)：1-3
[102]国家知识产权局规划发展司.2007年上半年我国有效专利状况分析.专利统计简报,2007(13)：1-10
[103]国家知识产权局规划发展司.有效专利首列国民经济和社会发展统计公报.专利统计简报,2009(5)：1-12
[104]姜晖.美国专利法的历史沿革.[DB/OL] http://hi.baidu.com/mingmingtuo/blog/item/balad6b48d8e94738bd4b2a1.html 2009-12-26
[105]江旭,高山行等.最优专利长度与宽度设计研究.科学学研究,2003(2)：191-195
[106]李建蓉.专利信息与利用.知识产权出版社,2006.120,335
[107]刘华,戚昌文.论专利制度的经济理性与预期绩效.研究与发展管理,2002(6)：63-68
[108]刘茂林.知识产权法的经济分析.北京：法律出版社,1997.6
[109]李晓安.法律效益探析.中国法学,1994(6)：5
[110]陆飞,吴桂琴.四所委属重点高校专利权提前终止因素探析.研究与发展管理,1994(5)：31-34
[111]路甬祥.不能根据论文和专利的数量评价技术创新.中国信息界,2005(16)：15
[112]穆丽红,胡亚妮,张志业.从有效专利看河北省高校技术创新能力.科技情报开发与经济,2009(21)：119-121
[113]潘士远.最优专利制度研究.经济研究,2005(12)：113-119
[114]乔永忠,文家春.国内外专利维持状况比较研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2009(6)：29-32
[115]乔永忠.基于专利信息视角的专利维持时间影响因素的回归分析.图书情报工作,2009(4)：42-45
[116]汤宗舜.专利法教程.法律出版社,2003.10
[117]万小丽,朱雪忠.国际视野下专利质量指标研究的现状与趋势.情报杂志,2009(7)：49-54
[118]万小丽,朱雪忠.竞争力视角下的专利质量界定.知识产权,2009(4)：7-14
[119]王桂强.对“专利最优保护期”生命周期模型的思考.科学学与科学技术管理,2004(5)：51-53
[120]杨中楷,孙玉涛.基于专利持有模型的我国有效专利分析.科技管理研究,2009(2)：254-257
[121]伊利奇·考夫著,柯瑞豪译.专利制度经济学.北京大学出版社,2005.59
[122]郑成思.知识产权论.法律出版社,2003.4
[123]郑中人.智慧财产权法导读(增订三版).五南,2003.15.18-19
[124]郑中人.专利制度与经济发展.[DB/OL] http://www.civillaw.com.cn/article/default.asp?id=19364 2008-12-2
[125]周凤华,朱雪忠.我国大学发明不同归属专利权维持特征分析.华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2007(6)：29-36
[126]朱雪忠,乔永忠,万小丽.基于维持时间的专利质量实证研究——以中国国家知识产权局1994年授权的发明专利为例.管理世界,2009(1)：174-175
[1]朱雪忠,乔永忠,万小丽.基于维持时间的专利质量实证研究——以中国国家知识产权局1994年授权的发明专利为例.《管理世界》,2009年第1期
[2]Qiao Yongzhong, Zhu Xuezhong. Patent Protection of the Traditional Chinese Medicine and Its Impact on the Related Industries in China. Journal of International Biotechnology Law,2009.10
[3]乔永忠.基于专利情报视角的专利维持时间影响因素分析.《图书情报工作》,2009年第4期
[4]乔永忠,文家春.国内外发明专利维持状况比较研究.《科学学与科学技术管理》,2009年第6期
[5]朱雪忠,乔永忠等.《国家财政资助发明创造专利权归属研究》.法律出版社,2009年10月
[6]朱雪忠主编,乔永忠副主编.《知识产权管理》.高等教育出版社,2010年2月
1参见国家知识产权局网站[DB/OL]http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo2008/yw/2009/200912/t20091218_485670.html 2009-12-19
1 World Intellectual Property Indicators, (2009 Edition). [DB/OL] http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/pdf/wipo_pub_941.pdf 2009-12-21
[1]Acs, A.J., and Audretsch, D.B. Innovation in Large and Small Firms:An Empirical Analysis. American Economic Review,1988,78(4):678-690
[2]Acs, Z.J. Anselin, L., Varga, A. Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production on New knowledge. Research Policy,2002,31(7):1069-1085
[3]Albert, D., Avery, P., McAllister and Narin, F. Direct Validation of Citation Counts as Indicators of Industrially Important Patents. Research Policy,1991, 20(3):251-259
[4]Alcacer, J., and Gittelman, M. Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations, the Review of Economics and Statistics, 2006,88(4),774-779
[5]Azoulay, P., Ding, W., Stuart, T. The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2007.63(4):599-623
[6]Baker, S., Lichtman, D. and Mezzetti, C. Disclosure and Investment as Strategies in the Patent Race, Journal of Law and Economics 2005,48:173-194
[7]Balkin, D.B. Markman, G.D. and Gomez-Mejia, L. Is CEO Pay in High-technology Firms Related to Innovation? Academy of Management Journal. 2000,43(6):1118-1129
[8]Baudry, M., Dumont, B. Patent Renewals as Options:Improving the Mechanisms for Weeding out Lousy Patents. Review of Industrial Organization,2006,28 (1): 41-62
[9]Bessen, J. The Value of U.S. Patents by Owner and Patent Characteristics, Research Policy,2008,37 (5):932-945
[10]Bottazzi, L., M. Da Rin and Hellmann, T. The Changing Face of the European Venture Capital Industry:Facts and Analysis', Journal of Private Equity,2004,8(1). http://www.insme.org/documenti/SEVeCa-SumReport.pdf
[11]Brcitzman and Narin, F. A Case for Patent Citation Analysis in Litigation. The law Works,1996.3
[12]Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. and Malerba, F. The Empirical Assessment of Firms' Technological Coherence:Data and Methodology, in The Economics and Management of Technological Diversification, J. Cantwell, A. Gambardella and 0. Granstrand (eds.), Routledge, London.2004
[13]Bulut, H. and Moschini, G Patents, Trade Secrets and the Correlation among R&D Projects, Economics Letters 2006,91(1):131-137
[14]Caballero, R. and Jaffe, A.M. How High are the Giants'Shoulders:An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth. In O. Blanchard and S. Fischer, eds., National Bureau of Economic Research Macroeconomics Annual,1993.8:15-74 MIT Press
[15]Candal, and Scotchmer, S. Coordinating Research through Research Joint Ventures. Journal of Public Economics,1993,51(2):173-193
[16]Carpenter, Narin, F. and Woolf, P. Citation Rates to Technologically Important Patents. World Patent Information,1981,3(4):160-163
[17]Chang, H.F. Patent Scope, Antitrust Policy and Cumulative Innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics,1995,26 (Spring),34-57
[18]Cheong, I. Invent or Develop? On Sequential Innovation and Patent Policy. Mimeograph, Department of Economics, Princeton University.1994
[19]Chou, T. and Haller, H. The Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation Reconsidered.1995, Working Paper E95-02, Department of Economics, VPI & State University
[20]Chu A. Effects of Blocking Patents on R&D:a Quantitative DGE Analysis. Journal of Economic Growth,2009,14(1):55-78
[21]CIPO. Intellectual Property-innovation on a Global Scale. Annual Repot 2001-02, 2
[22]Clark, M., Berven, H. The Face of the Patent is not the "Whole Story": Determining Effective Life of a Pharmaceutical Patent in the United States. World Patent Information,2004,26(4):283-295
[23]Cool, K., Roller, L.H., and Leleux, B. The Relative Impact of Actual and Potential Rivalry on Firm Profitability in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Strategic Management Journal,1999,20(1):1-14
[24]Cornelli, F. and Schankerman, M. Optimal Patent Renewals. LSE STICERD Research Paper No. EI13. January 1996. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1158292
[25]Cornelli, F. and Schankerman, M. Patent Renewals and R&D Inventive. RAND Journal of Economics,1999,30(2):197-213
[26]Crampes, C. and Langinier, C. Information Disclosure in the Renewal of Patents. Annalisa d'Economie et de Statistique,1998,49/50,262-288
[27]Cremer, J. and Scotchmer, S. Optimal R&D Procurement:Why Patents? Mimeo, University of California Berkeley,1996
[28]Dechenaux, E., M., Thursby and Thursby, J. Shirking, Sharing Risk and Shelving: The Role of University License Contracts, Discussion paper, Ken State University. 2007
[29]Deng, Y. A Dynamic Stochastic Analysis of International Patent Application and Renewal Processes.2006. Working paper, Southern Methodist University
[30]Deng, Y. Renewal Study of European Patents:A Three-country Comparison, Southern Methodist University of Dallas.2005, Working Paper
[31]Deng, Y. Private Value of European Patents. European Economic Review, 2007,51(7):1785-1812
[32]Duguet, E. and lung, N. R&D Investment, Patent Life and Patent Value, Institute National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques, Malakoff Cedex.1997, working paper No. G 9705
[33]Eaton, J. Kortum, S. Lerner, J. International Patenting and the European Patent Office:A Quantitative.2003. http://www.nber.org/CRIW/papers/eaton.pdf
[34]Emstholger. Patent Information for Strategic Technology Management. World Patent Information,2003,25 (3):233-242
[35]Espina, M.I. To Renew or not to Renew:An Empirical Study of Patent Valuation and Maintenance by the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, PhD,2003
[36]Evenson, R. International Invention:Implications for Technology Market Analysis' in Z. Griliches (ed.) R&D, Patents and Productivity, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.1984
[37]Fikkert, B., and Luthria, M. Intellectual Property Rights in a Developing Country: Estimates of the Private Value of Patent Protection in India. Mimeo.2000
[38]Futagami K, Iwaisako, T. Dynamic Analysis of Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model. Journal of Economic Theory,2007,132(1):306-334
[39]Gans, J.S., King, S. P and Lampe, R. Patent Renewal Fees and Self-Funding Patent Offices. The B.E. Journals in Theoretical Economics,2004,4(1):1-16
[40]Geuna, A., Nesta, and L.J.J. University Patenting and its Effects on Academic Research:The Emerging European Evidence. Research Policy,2006,35(6): 790-807
[41]Gilbert, R., and Shapiro, C. Optimal Patent Length and Breadth. The Rand Journal of Economics,1990,21(1) 106-112
[42]Gompers, P., and Lerner, J. The Venture Capital Revolution. Journal of Economic Perspective,2001,15(2):145-168
[43]Goto, A., Honjyo, N., Suzuki, K. and Takinozawa, M. Economic Analysis of Research and Development and Technological Progress. (in Japanese) Economic Analysis.1986:103
[44]Green, J. and Scotchmer, S. On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics,1995,26 (Spring):20-33
[45]Griliches, A. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28:1661-1701
[46]Griliches, Z. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey', Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28(4):1661-1707
[47]Griliches, Z. Patents:Recent Trends and Puzzles. Brookings Papers: Microeconomics,1989:291-319
[48]Griliches, Z., Hall, B.H. and Pakes, A. The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity', in Dasqupta, P. and P. Stoneman (eds), Economic Policy and Technological Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.1987
[49]Gronqvist, C. The Private Value of Patents by Patent Characteristics:Evidence from Finland. J Technol Transf,2009,34(2):159-168
[50]Hall, B. H. and MacGarvie, M. The Private Value of Software Patents.2006, NBER working paper 12195
[51]Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., and Trajtenberg, M. Market Value and Patent Citations. The Rand Journal of Economics,2005,36(1):16-38
[52]Hall, B., Jaff. A. and Trajtenberg, M. Market Value and Patent Citations:A First Look, National Bureau of Economic Research.2000, Working Paper No.7741
[53]Hall, B., Trajtenberg, M., and Jaffe, A.B. The Patent Citations Data File:Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools.2001, NBER Working Paper 8498
[54]Hall, B.H., Thoma, G, Torrisi, S. The Market Value of Patents and R&D:Evidence from European firms.2007, NBER Working Paper No.13426
[55]Harhoff, D. Patent Constructionism:Exploring the Microstructure of Patent Portfolios, Presentation Prepared for the EPO/OECD Conference on Patent Statistics for Policy Decision Making, Vienna,2006,10(3):23-24
[56]Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F., Vopel, K. Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions. The Review of Economics and Statistics.1999,81 (3): 511-515
[57]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M. and Vopel, K. Exploring the Tail of Patent Value Distributions.'Mimeo. Harvard University,1997
[58]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., and Vopel, K. Exploring the Tail of Patented Invention Value Distribution. In O. Granstrand (Ed.), Economics, law and intellectual property:Seeking strategies for research and teaching in a developing field. Kluwer Academic Publishers,2003
[59]Harhoff, D., Scherer, F., Vopel, K. Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights. Research Policy.2003,32 (8):1343-1363
[60]Hartwick, J. M. Patent Race Optimal with Respect to Entry.International Journal of Industrial Organization,1991(9):197-207
[61]Heller, M. A., and Eisenberg, R. S. Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommunism in Biomedical Research, Science,1998:280(5),698-701
[62]Hellmann, T. and Puri, M. Venture Capital and the Professionalization of Start-Up Firms:Empirical Evidence, Journal of Finance,2002,57(1):169-97
[63]Hitt, M. A., Dixon, R.D., Hoskisson, R.E. and Kochhar, R. Corporate Entrepreneurship and Cross-functional Fertilization:Activation, Process, and Disintegration of New Product Design Team. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,1991,23(3):145-167
[64]Holthausen, R.W., Larker, D.R., and Sloan, R.G Business Unit Innovation and the Structure of Executive Eompensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics,1995, 19(2-3):279-313
[65]Horstmann, J., MacDonald, G. and Slivinski, A. Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms:To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent. Journal of Political Economy, 1985,93(5):837-58
[66]Reitzig M. What Determines Patent Value? Insights from the Semiconductor industry. Research Policy.2003,32(11):13-26
[67]Reitzig, M. Improving Patent Valuations for Management Purposes-validating New Indicators by Analyzing Application Rationales. Research Policy,2004,33, (6-7):939-957
[68]Rossman, J. and B.S. Sanders. The Patent Utilization Study, Patent, Trademark and Copyright. Journal of Research and Education,1957,7(1):74-111
[69]Sapsalis, E. and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, The Institutional Sources of Knowledge and the Value of Academic Patents, Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2007,16(2):139-157
[70]Schankerman, M. and Pakes, A. Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period. The Economic Journal,1986, 96(12):1052-1076
[71]Schankerman, M. How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field. RAND Journal of Economics,1998,29(1):77-107
[72]Schankerman, M. Strategies to Improve Patenting and Enforcement, IPKat,29 May 2008. Consulted on June 1,2008
[73]Scherer, F. M., and Harhoff, D. Technology Policy for a World of Skew-distributed Outcomes. Research Policy,2000,29(4):559-566
[74]Schmitz, J.A. On the Breadth of Patent Protection. Mimeograph, State University of New York at Stony Brook.1989
[75]Schmookler, J. Invention and Economic Growth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.1966
[76]Scotchmer, S. On the Optimality of the Patent Renewal System. RAND Journal of Economics, (1999)30(2):181-196
[77]Scotchmer, S. Protecting Early Innovators:Should Second Generation Products be Patentable? The Rand Journal of Economics,1996,27(2) 117-126
[78]Scotchmer, S. Standing on the Shoulders of Giants:Cumulative Research and the Patent Law, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Symposium on Intellectual Property Law,1991,5(1):29-41
[79]Sullivan, R. J. Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in Britain and Ireland: 1852-1876. Economics,1994,61(2):37-58
[80]Svensson, R. Commercialization of Patents and External Financing during the R&D-Phase. Research Policy,2007,36(7):1052-69
[81]Svensson, R. Licensing or Acquiring Patents? Evidence from Patent Renewal Data. Research Institute of Industrial Economics,2008, Working Paper 13938. http://www.nber.org/papers/w13938.pdf
[82]Thomas, P. The Effect of Technological Impact upon Patent Renewal Decisions. Technology Analysis &Strategic Management,1999,11(2):181-197
[83]Thursby J. Fuller A.W. and Thursby M. US Faculty Patenting:Inside and Outside the University, Research Policy.2009,38(1):14-25
[84]Tong, X., Frame J.D. Measuring National Technological Performance with Patent Claims Data. Research Policy,1994,23(2):133-142
[85]Trajtenber, M. A Penny for Your Quotes:Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics,1990,21(1):172-187
[86]Trajtenberg, M. Innovation in Israel 1968-1997:A Comparative Analysis Using Patent Data. Research Policy,2001,30(3):363-389
[87]Trajtenberg, M., Jaffe, A. and Henderson, R. University versus Corporate Patents: A Window on the Basicness of Invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,1997,5(1):19-50
[88]Van Dijk, T. Patent Height and Competition in Product Improvements. Journal of Industrial Economics,1996,44(2):151-167
[89]Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. and D. Francois, The Cost Factor in Patent Systems, Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, in Press.2006, DOI 10.1007/s10842-008-0033-2
[90]Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. and N. van Zeebroeck, A Brief History of Space and Time:the Scope-Year Index as a Patent Value Indicator Based on Families and Renewals, Scientometrics,2008,75(2):319-338
[91]Van Zeebroeck, N. and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Filing Strategies and Patent Value,2008, CEPR Working Paper 6821
[92]Van Zeebroeck, N., B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie and D. Guellec, Claiming more:the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants. Research Policy,2009,38 (6):1006-1020
[93]Van Zeebroeck, N., B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, W. Han, Issues in Measuring the Degree of Technological Specialization with Patent Data, Scientometrics,2006, Vol.66 (3):481-492
[94]Wagner, P. R. and Strandburg, K. J. The Obviousness Requirement in the Patent Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review,2007,155(2):96
[95]Webster, E., Palangkaraya, A. and Jensen, P. Characteristics of International Patent Application Outcomes, Economics Letters,2007,95 (3):362-368
[96]White, N. L. Time Waits for no Man:Deciding when to File a Patent Application in Europe. Nat. Biotechnol.2007,25 (6):639-641
[97]William H. Brown, Trends in Patent Renewals at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. World Patent Information,1995,17(4):225-234
[98]Wright, B. The Economics of Invention Incentives:Patents, Prizes and Research Contracts. American Economic Review,1983,73(4):691-707
[99]陈云伟,杨志萍,方曙等.基于发明专利现状的我国技术创新能力分析.科技管理研究,2007(6)：9-12
[100]高山行,郭华涛.中国专利权质量估计及分析.管理工程学报,2002(3)：66-68
[101]国家知识产权局规划发展司.2007年上半年专利申请与授权状况综述.专利统计简报,2007(10)：1-3
[102]国家知识产权局规划发展司.2007年上半年我国有效专利状况分析.专利统计简报,2007(13)：1-10
[103]国家知识产权局规划发展司.有效专利首列国民经济和社会发展统计公报.专利统计简报,2009(5)：1-12
[104]姜晖.美国专利法的历史沿革.[DB/OL] http://hi.baidu.com/mingmingtuo/blog/item/balad6b48d8e94738bd4b2a1.html 2009-12-26
[105]江旭,高山行等.最优专利长度与宽度设计研究.科学学研究,2003(2)：191-195
[106]李建蓉.专利信息与利用.知识产权出版社,2006.120,335
[107]刘华,戚昌文.论专利制度的经济理性与预期绩效.研究与发展管理,2002(6)：63-68
[108]刘茂林.知识产权法的经济分析.北京：法律出版社,1997.6
[109]李晓安.法律效益探析.中国法学,1994(6)：5
[110]陆飞,吴桂琴.四所委属重点高校专利权提前终止因素探析.研究与发展管理,1994(5)：31-34
[111]路甬祥.不能根据论文和专利的数量评价技术创新.中国信息界,2005(16)：15
[112]穆丽红,胡亚妮,张志业.从有效专利看河北省高校技术创新能力.科技情报开发与经济,2009(21)：119-121
[113]潘士远.最优专利制度研究.经济研究,2005(12)：113-119
[114]乔永忠,文家春.国内外专利维持状况比较研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2009(6)：29-32
[115]乔永忠.基于专利信息视角的专利维持时间影响因素的回归分析.图书情报工作,2009(4)：42-45
[116]汤宗舜.专利法教程.法律出版社,2003.10
[117]万小丽,朱雪忠.国际视野下专利质量指标研究的现状与趋势.情报杂志,2009(7)：49-54
[118]万小丽,朱雪忠.竞争力视角下的专利质量界定.知识产权,2009(4)：7-14
[119]王桂强.对“专利最优保护期”生命周期模型的思考.科学学与科学技术管理,2004(5)：51-53
[120]杨中楷,孙玉涛.基于专利持有模型的我国有效专利分析.科技管理研究,2009(2)：254-257
[121]伊利奇·考夫著,柯瑞豪译.专利制度经济学.北京大学出版社,2005.59
[122]郑成思.知识产权论.法律出版社,2003.4
[123]郑中人.智慧财产权法导读(增订三版).五南,2003.15.18-19
[124]郑中人.专利制度与经济发展.[DB/OL] http://www.civillaw.com.cn/article/default.asp?id=19364 2008-12-2
[125]周凤华,朱雪忠.我国大学发明不同归属专利权维持特征分析.华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2007(6)：29-36
[126]朱雪忠,乔永忠,万小丽.基于维持时间的专利质量实证研究——以中国国家知识产权局1994年授权的发明专利为例.管理世界,2009(1)：174-175
[1]朱雪忠,乔永忠,万小丽.基于维持时间的专利质量实证研究——以中国国家知识产权局1994年授权的发明专利为例.《管理世界》,2009年第1期
[2]Qiao Yongzhong, Zhu Xuezhong. Patent Protection of the Traditional Chinese Medicine and Its Impact on the Related Industries in China. Journal of International Biotechnology Law,2009.10
[3]乔永忠.基于专利情报视角的专利维持时间影响因素分析.《图书情报工作》,2009年第4期
[4]乔永忠,文家春.国内外发明专利维持状况比较研究.《科学学与科学技术管理》,2009年第6期
[5]朱雪忠,乔永忠等.《国家财政资助发明创造专利权归属研究》.法律出版社,2009年10月
[6]朱雪忠主编,乔永忠副主编.《知识产权管理》.高等教育出版社,2010年2月