Items where Subject is "T201 Patents. Trademarks"

Library of Congress subjects (102130) T Technology (3397) T Technology (General) (2658) T201 Patents. Trademarks (83)
Number of items at this level: 83.
A
  • Alfaro, Laura, Bao, Cathy, Chen, Maggie X., Hong, Junjie, Steinwender, Claudia (2022). Omnia Juncta in Uno*: foreign powers and trademark protection in Shanghai's concession era. (CEP Discussion Papers 1827). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Drivas, Kyriakos, Anagnosti, Afroditi (2025). On the role of innovation in the generation of value-added trade opportunities. (GreeSE Papers: Hellenic Observatory Discussion Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe 207). Hellenic Observatory, London School of Economics and Political Science. picture_as_pdf
  • Sampat, Bhaven N., Shadlen, Kenneth C., Amin, Tahir M. (2012). Challenges to India's pharmaceutical patent laws. Science, 337(6093), 414-415. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1224892
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C., Sampat, Bhaven N., Amin, Tahir M. (2012). Balancing innovation and access: India’s pharmaceutical patent laws. picture_as_pdf
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2007). Institutional nature of the patent system: implications for bioethical decision-making. In Lenk, Christian, Hoppe, Nils, Andorno, Roberto (Eds.), Ethics and Law of Intellectual Property (pp. 247-268). Ashgate Dartmouth.
    • B
  • Beckett, Charlie (2009). Why shouldn't the mail steal your photos?
  • Bergeaud, Antonin, Schmidt, Juliane, Zago, Riccardo (2022). Patents that match your standards: firm-level evidence on competition and innovation. (CEP Discussion Papers 1881). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Bergeaud, Antonin, Verluise, Cyril (2022). The rise of China's technological power: the perspective from frontier technologies. (CEP Discussion Papers 1876). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Bloom, Nick, Draca, Mirko, Van Reenen, John (2011). Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT and productivity. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1000). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Bonadio, Enrico, McDonagh, Luke, Dinev, Plamen (2021). Artificial intelligence as inventor: exploring the consequences for patent law. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2021(1), 48 - 66. picture_as_pdf
  • Cammaerts, Bart, Meng, Bingchun, Mansell, Robin (2013). Copyright and creation: a case for promoting inclusive online sharing. (LSE Media Policy Project Series Media Policy Brief 9). Department of Media and Communications.
  • Chetty, Raj, Bell, Alex, Jaravel, Xavier, Petkova, Neviana, Van Reenen, John (2019). Do tax cuts produce more Einsteins? The impact of financial incentives vs. exposure to innovation on the supply of inventors. (CEP Discussion Papers 1597). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Gangjee, Dev (2008). (Re)locating geographical indications: a response to Bronwyn Parry. In Bently, Lionel, Davis, Jennifer, Ginsburg, Jane C. (Eds.), Trade Marks and Brands: an Interdisciplinary Critique (pp. 381-397). Cambridge University Press.
  • McDonagh, Luke, Bonadio, Enrico (2019). Standard essential patents and the Internet of Things. (In-depth anaylsis). Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament. https://doi.org/10.2861/330300
  • Pottage, Alain, Sherman, Brad (2011). Kinds, clones, and manufactures. In Biagioli, Mario, Jaszi, Peter, Woodmansee, Martha (Eds.), Making and Unmaking Intellectual Property: Creative Production in Legal and Cultural Perspective (pp. 269-283). University of Chicago Press.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani, Ramakrishna, T. (2007). Intellectual property rights in biotechnology: key issues. In Ramamurthi, R., Bali, Geetha (Eds.), Biotechnology and Biosafety (pp. 93-114). Aph Publishing Corporation.
    • C
  • Cammaerts, Bart, Meng, Bingchun (2011). Creative destruction and copyright protection: regulatory responses to file-sharing. (LSE Media Policy Project Series Media Policy Brief 1). Department of Media and Communications, London School of Economics and Political Science.
  • Cockburn, Iain, Lanjouw, Jean O., Schankerman, Mark (2014). Patents and the global diffusion of new drugs. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1298). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance.
  • Contreras, Jorge L., Husovec, Martin, Rimmer, Matthew (2025). Utility models and other forms of sub-patent protection. In Contreras, Jorge L. (Ed.), Sub-patent Innovation Rights: Utility Models, Petty Patents and Innovation Patents Around the World (pp. 1 - 18). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009478113.003 picture_as_pdf
  • Conway, Declan, Dechezlepretre, Antoine, Haščič, Ivan, Johnstone, Nick (2015). Invention and diffusion of water supply and water efficiency technologies: insights from a global patent dataset. Water Economics and Policy, 01(04). https://doi.org/10.1142/S2382624X15500101
  • Verluise, Cyril, Cristelli, Gabriele, Higham, Kyle, de Rassenfosse, Gaétan (2025). Beyond the front page: in‐text citations to patents as traces of inventor knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.70027 picture_as_pdf
    • D
  • Dechezlepretre, Antoine (2013). Fast-tracking 'green' patent applications: an empirical analysis. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1197). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance.
  • Dechezlepretre, Antoine, Glachant, Matthieu, Ménière, Yann (2013). What drives the international transfer of climate change mitigation technologies? Empirical evidence from patent data. Environmental and Resource Economics, 54(2), 161 - 178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9592-0
  • Dossi, Gaia, Morando, Marta (2023). Political ideology and innovation. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1969). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
    • E
  • Exeter College University of Oxford (2002). Human genome patents and developing countries. (Study Paper 10). Commission on Intellectual Property Rights.
    • G
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C., Guennif, Samira, Guzmán, Alenka, Lalitha, N. (Eds.) (2011). Intellectual property, pharmaceuticals and public health: access to drugs in developing countries. Edward Elgar.
  • Galasso, Alberto, Schankerman, Mark (2008). Patent thickets and the market for innovation: evidence from settlement of patent disputes. (CEP Discussion Papers 889). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance.
  • Galasso, Alberto, Schankerman, Mark (2010). Patent thickets, courts, and the market for innovation. RAND Journal of Economics, 41(3), 472-503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00108.x
  • Galasso, Alberto, Schankerman, Mark (2013). Patents and cumulative innovation: causal evidence from the courts. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1205). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance.
  • Galasso, Alberto, Schankerman, Mark, Serrano, Carlos J. (2011). Trading and enforcing patent rights. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP1072). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Galasso, Alberto, Schankerman, Mark, Serrano, Carlos J. (2013). Trading and enforcing patent rights. RAND Journal of Economics, 44(2), 275-312. https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-2171.12020
  • Gangjee, Dev (2003). Lots in a name: would 'diluted' marks still sell as sweetly? Student Bar Review, 15, 5-23.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2006). Melton Mowbray and the GI pie in the sky: exploring cartographies of protection. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 3, 291-309.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2006). Protecting geographical indications as collective trademarks: the prospects and pitfalls. Institute of Intellectual Property.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2007). Quibbling siblings: conflicts between trade marks and geographical indications. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 82(3), 1253-1291.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2012). Relocating the law of geographical indications. Cambridge University Press.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2007). Say cheese!: a sharper image of generic use through the lens of Feta. European Intellectual Property Review, 29(5), 172-179.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2008). The polymorphism of trademark dilution in India. Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, 17(3), 101-120.
  • Gangjee, Dev (2002). A scoping study of global trademark law: the rise of the ®. (IPAC Report 3). Intellectual Property Institute.
  • Pottage, Alain, Sherman, Brad (2013). On the prehistory of intellectual property. In Howe, Helena, Griffiths, Jonathan (Eds.), Concepts of Property in Intellectual Property (pp. 11-28). Cambridge University Press.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2011). The politics of patents and drugs in Brazil and Mexico: the industrial bases of health policies. In Shadlen, Kenneth C., Guennif, Samira, Guzmán, Alenka, Lalitha, N. (Eds.), Intellectual Property, Pharmaceuticals and Public Health: Access to Drugs in Developing Countries (pp. 178-201). Edward Elgar.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C., Guennif, Samira, Guzmán, Alenka, Lalitha, N. (2011). Globalization, intellectual property rights, and pharmaceuticals: meeting the challenges to addressing health gaps in the new international environment. In Shadlen, Kenneth C., Guennif, Samira, Guzmán, Alenka, Lalitha, N. (Eds.), Intellectual Property, Pharmaceuticals and Public Health: Access to Drugs in Developing Countries (pp. 1-28). Edward Elgar.
    • H
  • Harhoff, Dietmar, Mueller, Elisabeth, Van Reenen, John (2014). What are the channels for technology sourcing? Panel data evidence from German companies. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 23(1), 204 - 224. https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12043
  • Jenny, Frédéric, Lianos, Ioannis, Hovenkamp, Herbert, Marshall, Frances, Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2013). Competition law, intellectual property rights and dynamic analysis: towards a new institutional “equilibrium?”. Concurrences, 2013(4), p. 13. https://doi.org/Art. N° 58808
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2009). Timing, change and continuity in the patent system. In Haunss, Sebastian, Shadlen, Kenneth C. (Eds.), Politics of Intellectual Property: Contestation Over the Ownership, Use, and Control of Knowledge and Information (pp. 211-238). Edward Elgar.
    • K
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani, Kumaramangalam, K. (2008). Peer-review and patents: why the goose that lays the golden egg may be a red herring. European Intellectual Property Review, 30(5), 171-173.
    • L
  • Shepherd, Tamara, Landry, Normand (2013). Technology design and power: freedom and control in communication networks. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 9(3), 259-275. https://doi.org/10.1386/macp.9.3.259_1
    • M
  • Mansell, Robin, Steinmueller, W. Edward (1995). Intellectual property rights: the development of information infrastructures for the information society. Science and Technology Options Assessment, European Parliament.
  • McDonagh, Luke (2025). False hope and fictitious patents: evaluating the intellectual property of OxyContin. (LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 12/2025). London School of Economics and Political Science. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5178292 picture_as_pdf
  • McDonagh, Luke (2025). An impressive overview of European patent law in the UPC era. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, 20(4), 281 - 282. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpae113
  • McDonagh, Luke (2025). False hope and fictitious patents: evaluating the intellectual property of OxyContin. Social and Legal Studies, https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639251391427 picture_as_pdf
  • Menon, Carlo (2009). Stars and comets: an exploration of the patent universe. (SERC Discussion Papers SERCDP0037). Spatial Economics Research Centre (SERC), London School of Economics and Political Science.
  • Mercadante Santino De Oliveira, Eduardo, Minssen, Timo, Shadlen, Kenneth C., van Zimmeren, Esther, Zemła-Pacud, Żaneta, Matthews, Duncan (2025). A global landscape of patenting activity in COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine, 67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127866 picture_as_pdf
  • Moran, Danielle (2010). Music, creativity and copyright: Sharkey gig at LSE.
    • N
  • Nathan, Max, Rosso, Anna (2019). Innovative events. (CEP Discussion Papers 1607). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
  • Nathan, Max (2015). Same difference? Minority ethnic inventors, diversity and innovation in the UK. Journal of Economic Geography, 15(1), 129-168. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu006
  • Noel, Michael, Schankerman, Mark (2006). Strategic patenting and software innovation. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP0740). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance. picture_as_pdf
    • P
  • Pottage, Alain (2011). Law machines: scale models, forensic materiality and the making of modern patent law. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 621-643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711408484
    • S
  • Schankerman, Mark (1991). How valuable is patent protection? Estimates by technology field using patent renewal data. (CEP Discussion Papers CEPDP0046). London School of Economics and Political Science. Centre for Economic Performance.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2015). Intellectual Property, Access to Medicines, and Health – Ken Shadlen.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2012). The Mexican exception: patents and innovation policy in a non-conformist and reluctant middle income country. European Journal of Development Research, 24(2), 300-318. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2012.9
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2008). Policy space for intellectual property management: contrasting multilateral and regional-bilateral arrangements. Econômica, 10(2), 55-81.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2017). Trade agreements, patents, and drug prices: Continuing the debate.
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2011). The political contradictions of incremental innovation: lessons from pharmaceutical patent examination in Brazil. Politics & Society, 39(2), 143-174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329211402601
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C. (2011). The puzzling politics of patents and innovation policy in Mexico. Law and Business Review of the Americas, 17(1).
  • Shepherd, Tamara (2012). Copyright and tuition hikes: Canadian civic engagement and cultural production.
  • Shepherd, Tamara (2011). Ideas for sale: what you need to know about intellectual property. Shameless Magazine, (19),
  • Shepherd, Tamara (2012). Persona rights for user-generated content: a normative framework for privacy and intellectual property regulation. TripleC, 10(1), 100-113.
  • Stannard, Emily (2017). Book review: copyright and E-learning: a guide for practitioners, 2nd ed. by Jane Secker with Chris Morrison.
    • T
  • Tate, Anya (2025). The impact of novelty examination on the regional distribution of patenting activity in early 20th century Britain. (Economic History Student Working Papers 43). Department of Economic History, The London School of Economics and Political Science. picture_as_pdf
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2013). Compulsory licenses for pharmaceuticals: an inconvenient truth?
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2009). Increasing returns in the patent system: institutional sources and consequences for law. (LSE law, society and economy working papers 07-2009). Department of Law, London School of Economics and Political Science.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2014). Learning needs in the patent system and emerging technologies: a focus on synthetic biology. Intellectual Property Quarterly, (1), 13-39.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2009). Legal transplants in patent law: why "utility" is the new "industrial applicability". Jurimetrics, 49(2), 155-201.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2014). Novartis v Union of India and the person skilled in the art: a missed opportunity. Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 4(1), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.4337/qmjip.2014.01.04
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2013). Novartis v Union of India and the person skilled in the art: a missed opportunity. London School of Economics and Political Science ; Social Sciences Research Network.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2010). Patent litigation in the United Kingdom: solutions in search of a problem? European Intellectual Property Review, 32(5), 238-246.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2002). Patents and human genome research in developing countries: problems and proposals. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 5(5), 685-723. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2002.tb00178.x
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2007). Patents as credence goods. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 27(4), 707-740. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqm021
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2010). SMEs and patent litigation: policy-based evidence making? European Intellectual Property Review, 32(3), 143-145.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2002). Understanding morality as a ground for exclusion from patentability under European law. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, 12(2), 48-53.
  • Thambisetty, Sivaramjani (2012). The analytical significance of emergence in the patent system. (Evidence review for the Working Group on Emerging Biotechnologies). Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
    • V
  • Vandoros, Sotiris (2014). Therapeutic substitution post-patent expiry: the cases of ace inhibitors and proton pump inhibitors. Health Economics, 23(5), 621-630. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.2935