Abstract
This article comprehensively investigates the differences between standard-essential patents (SEPs) and nonstandard-essential patents (N-SEPs) in terms of knowledge sources, novelty, and generality and investigates the impact of knowledge sources on novelty and generality. Specifically, we take a sample of declared SEPs related to long-term evolution standards and their corresponding N-SEPs from 2006 to 2015. To explore the differences between SEPs and N-SEPs in terms of knowledge sources, we used patent bibliometric analysis and text analysis methods to mine the technological domain, scientific literature, and standard literature involved in the backward citations of patents. Then, three indicators are established: 1) technological diversity, 2) science linkage, and 3) standard linkage. Standard linkage has rarely been discussed in the literature. We used text analysis to construct two indicators, the novelty and generality indices, which depict the differences in novelty and generality between SEPs and N-SEPs by comparing the text similarity of focal patents to prior and subsequent patents. The impact of different knowledge sources on SEPs and N-SEPs was verified through empirical analysis. This article innovatively found that SEPs are less technologically diverse and scientifically related, whereas their standard linkage is higher than that of N-SEPs. SEPs are more generic and less novel than N-SEPs. In addition, different knowledge sources have distinct effects on the novelty and generality of SEPs and N-SEPs. These findings can provide a reference for firms’ knowledge acquisition, resource allocation, and selection of R&D partners in the patent creation process.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
