- Email: [email protected]
Literature listing
World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
World Patent Information journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/worpatin
Literature listing 1. Books 1.1. Recent reports and other monographs The “World Intellectual Property Report 2011 – The Changing Face of Innovation” Describes how ownership of intellectual property rights has become central to the strategies of innovating firms worldwide. http://www.wipo.int/econ_stat/en/economics/wipr/ WIPO’s World Intellectual Property Indicators 2011. Draws on data from national and regional IP offices, WIPO, the World Bank and UNESCO. http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/wipi/index.html Options for an EU instrument for patent valorisation Expert Group on IPR Valorisation, European Union, 2012. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/files/optionseu-instrument-patent-valorisation_en.pdf Handbook of quality procedures before the EPO The result of co-operation between the EPO and users, in particular the EPI and BusinessEurope. European Patent Office, 2012. http://www.epo.org/service-support/publications/procedure/ handbook.html Patent and Trademarks in China An overview of patents and trade marks, how to apply for them and how to enforce rights in case of an infringement. Nordic IPR Forum, 2012. http://www.nordicipr.com/Event.aspx?id¼640932 The ICC Intellectual Property Roadmap Business guide to key intellectual property policy issues worldwide. The International Chamber of Commerce, 2012. http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ip/id2950/index.html
1.2. Reviews are available as follows:
Reviewed by Scassa T., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 111–118. The Common Law of Intellectual property by Catherine W Ng, Lionel Bently, Giuseppina D’Agostino (Eds), Hart, 2010 Reviewed by Odell-West A., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2011.(4), 410–411. EU Intellectual Property Law by Trevor Cook, OUP, 2010 Reviewed by L. McDonagh, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2011, 6 (12), 915. US Patent Prosecutor’s Desk Reference by Joshua P. Graham and Thomas G. Marlow, OUP, 2011. Reviewed by D.Nelms, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 146. Clean Tech Intellectual Property: Eco-marks, Green Patents, and Green Innovation Eric L. Lane OUP, 2011 Reviewed by K.R. Srinivas, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 147–148. 2. Journals The listing in this issue includes entries found using SciVerse ScopusÔ, Elsevier’s abstract and indexing database which gives access to almost 18000 peer-reviewed titles from more than 5000 international publishers.
2.1. Search techniques, databases and analysis: classification: searcher certification 2.1.1. Search techniques, databases Document image retrieval using signature as query Shirdhonkar M.S., Kokare M.B., 2011 2nd International Conference on Computer and Communication Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ ICCCT.2011.6075200, 66–70.
European Patent Law: Towards a Uniform Interpretation by Stefan Luginbuehl, Centre for Intellectual Property Law, 2011 Reviewed by Jacob R., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 70–71.
Showcase: A database for standards and patents Bekkers R., Catalini C., Martinelli A., Simcoe T., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083601.
Patent practice in Japan And Europe by Bernd Hansen, Dirk Schüssler-Langeheine (eds), Wolters Kluwer, 2011 Reviewed by Takenaka T., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (2), 135–136.
A “flow” based method for knowledge mining and visualization of patents Sheng Q., Hou W., Wang X., Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2012, 127, 543–548.
Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patents, Trade-Marks, 2nd edition by David Vaver, Irwin Law, 2011
The mathematics of patent claim analysis Kacsuk Z., Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2011, 19 (4), 263–289.
doi:10.1016/j.wpi.2012.03.004
258
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
A hybrid collaborative filtering algorithm for patent domain Zhi L., Wang H., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 159 CCIS (PART 2), 1–6. IPC code analysis of patent documents using association rules and maps – Patent analysis of database technology Jun S., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 258 CCIS, 21–30. The development of a modified TRIZ Technical System ontology Prickett P., Aparicio I., Computers in Industry, 2012, DOI: 10.1016/ j.compind.2012.01.006. A framework for automatic TRIZ level of invention estimation of patents using natural language processing, knowledge-transfer and patent citation metrics Li Z., Tate D., Lane C., Adams C., CAD Computer Aided Design, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.cad.2011.12.006. Improving retrievability with improved cluster-based pseudo-relevance feedback selection Bashir S., Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/ j.eswa.2012.01.041. A three-phase method for patent classification Chen Y.-L., Chang Y.-C., Information Processing and Management, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2011.11.001. A study on query expansion methods for patent retrieval Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 19–24. Automatic construction of a bilingual thesaurus using citation analysis Nanba H., Mayumi S., Takezawa T., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 25–29. Patent image retrieval: A survey. Hanbury A., Bhatti N., Lupu M., Morzinger R., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 3–7. Patent search using IPC classification vectors. Verma M., Varma V., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 9–12. PatOlympics: An infrastructure for interactive evaluation of patent retrieval tools. Lupu M., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 25–28. The status of retrieval evaluation in the patent domain. Lupu M., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 31–36. United we fall, divided we stand: A study of query segmentation and PRF for patent prior art search. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 13–17. Utilizing sub-topical structure of documents for information retrieval. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 75–78.
Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 1925–1928. Patent query reduction using pseudo relevance feedback. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 1953–1956. European research in the field of production technology and manufacturing systems: an exploratory analysis through publications and patents. Franceschini F., Maisano D., Turina E., International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2011, 1–22. Granulometry based detection of junction and end points in patent drawings. Bhatti N.A., Hanbury A., ISPA 2011 – 7th International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis, 2011, 6046624, 307–312. Effective query generation and postprocessing strategies for prior art patent search. Cetintas S., Si L., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 51 (14), DOI: 10.1002/asi.21708. An intelligent system for automated binary knowledge document classification and content analysis. Chiang T.-A., Wu C.-Y., Trappey C.V., Trappey A.J.C., Journal of Universal Computer Science, 2011, 17 (14), 1991–2008. Query phrase expansion using Wikipedia in patent class search. Al-Shboul B., Myaeng S.-H., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011, 7097 LNCS, 115–126. PatentRank: An ontology-based approach to patent search. Li M., Zheng H.-T., Jiang Y., Xia S.-T., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011, 7063 LNCS (PART 2), 399–405. English-to-Chinese translation for technical terms based on improved mutual information. Lin X., Jiang D., Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 2011, 121 LNEE, 519–525. Circulation of collective intelligence through patents: An early progress report. Koiti H., Hidetsugu N., Takashi I., Makoto I., Taiichi H., Atsushi F., Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011, 27, 113–121. Identifying bilingual synonymous technical terms from phrase tables and parallel patent sentences. Liang B., Utsuro T., Yamamoto M., Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011, 27, 50–60. Graphics/image retrieval method. Li S.-A., Chen S.-Y., Su S., Duh D.-J., Li S., Proceedings – 2011 Conference on Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2011, 6120714, 19–24. Research on element sub-sentence in Chinese-English patent machine translation. Liu Z., Jin Y., Chi Y., Proceedings – 2011 International Conference on Asian Language Processing, 2011, 6121501, 193–196.
4th International Workshop on Patent Information Retrieval (PaIR’11). Lupu M., Hanbury A., Rauber A., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 2623–2624.
Keyword elicitation for patent retrieval by using bibliographic information. Wang L.H., Li Y.R., Proceedings – 3rd International Conference on Data Mining and Intelligent Information Technology Applications, 2011, 6108420, 163–167.
An efficient method for using machine translation technologies in cross-language patent search.
Retrieval of patent documents from heterogeneous sources using ontologies and similarity analysis.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Taduri S., Lau G.T., Law K.H., Kesan J.P., Proceedings – 5th IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing, 2011, 6061369, 538–545. A rules and statistical learning based method for Chinese patent information extraction. Feng G., Chen X., Peng Z., Proceedings -8th Web Information Systems and Applications Conference, Workshop on Semantic Web and Ontolog, Workshop on Electronic Government Technology and Application, 2011, 6093576, 114–118. A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis. Gerken J.M., Moehrle M.G., Scientometrics, 2012, 1–26. Do You Want to Be a Patent Searcher?. Simmons E., Searcher (US), 2011, 19 (10), 30. Which is the best search system in Asia. Jagalla C., Managing Intellectual Property, 2011,(215), 54–57. The technique of shape-based multi-feature combination of trademark image retrieval Zhang C., You F.-C., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 429, 287– 291. Trademark image retrieval algorithm based on SIFT feature. Jia S., Xiao N., Jie Z., Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 2012, 113 LNEE, 201-207. 2.1.2. Analysis and statistics A patent quality analysis for innovative technology and product development. Trappey A.J.C., Trappey C.V., Wu C.-Y., Lin C.-W., Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2012, 26 (1), 26–34. Innovation status and trends of Korea nano-sensor technology from a perspective of patent analysis. Zheng J., Lei X., Zhao Y., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 413, 7–10. Using patent data to explore technology trajectory and trends of shading device. Yu Y.H., Yi K.J., Yeng H.P., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 403408, 3402–3407. Research on the wind energy technology of Germany based on patent analysis. Lei X.-P., Liu R.-S., Zhao Y.-H., Zheng J., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 112, 715–723. Literature review of new industry development research based on patent. Wu F., Zhou Q., Huang L., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 106, 379–382. Dynamic relationships of knowledge creation activities in supply chains: Evidence from patent data in the US auto industry. Lin Y., Chen J., Chen Y., African Journal of Business Management, 2011, 5 (32), 12563-12576. Applications of genetic algorithm and text mining on technology innovation. Yoon B., Yang J., Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2012, 145, 287– 291. The use of patent databases to predict trends in the krill fishery. Foster J., Nicol S., Kawaguchi S., CCAMLR Science, 2011, 18, 135–144. Modeling and analyzing technology innovation in the energy sector: Patent-based HMM approach. Lee S., Lee H.-j., Yoon B., Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2011.12.002.
259
Diffusion of environmental technologies: a patent citation analysis of glass melting and glass burners. Goetzke F., Rave T., Triebswetter U., Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 2012, 1–29. Research on technological trajectories based on patent documents and related empirical study. Lu-Cheng H., Yan L., International Conference on Management Science and Engineering – Annual Conference Proceedings, 2011, 6070078, 988–993. The quality difference analysis between environmental patents and non-environmental patents in China. Chong-Feng W., International Conference on Management Science and Engineering – Annual Conference Proceedings, 2011, 6070135, 1401–1406. A patent analysis on advanced biohydrogen technology development and commercialisation: Scope and competitiveness. Olivo C., Lebedeva I., Chu C.-Y., Lin C.-Y., Wu S.-Y., International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2011, 36 (21), 14103–14110. Market and patent analysis of commercializing biohydrogen technology. Lai W.-H., Chen H.-Y., Chang F.-Y., Wu C.-C., Lin C.-Y., Huang S.-R., International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2011, 36 (21), 14049–14058. Modeling the region patent applications based on P-SVM and SA. Xu S., Tang T., Zhao H., Journal of Computers, 2011, 6 (12), 2541– 2545. The relationships between the patent performance and corporation performance. Chang K.-C., Chen D.-Z., Huang M.-H., Journal of Informetrics, 2012, 6 (1), 131–139. Backbone of technology evolution in the modern era automobile industry: An analysis by the patents citation network. Lin Y., Chen J., Chen Y., Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2011, 20 (4), 416–442. Applicability of patent information in technological forecasting: A sector-specific approach. Yoon B., Lee S., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 37–45. Research on competitive strategy in mobile communication with patentometrics. Shen J., Wang X., Gao J., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6115492, 324–327. Assessing the data processing innovations for inventory management with patent analysis. Shen C.-W., Cheng C.-C., Proceedings – 5th International Conference on New Trends in Information Science and Service Science, 2011, 2, 6093449, 324–327. The inventive activities and collaboration pattern of universityindustry-government in China based on patent analysis. Lei X.-P., Zhao Z.-Y., Zhang X., Chen D.-Z., Huang M.-H., Zhao Y.-H., Scientometrics, 2012, 90 (1), 231–251. Using the entropy-based patent measure to explore the influences of related and unrelated technological diversification upon technological competences and firm performance. Chen Y.-S., Chang K.-C., Scientometrics, 2012, 90 (3), 825–841. Mapping technological innovations through patent analysis: a case study of foreign multinationals and indigenous firms in China. Wong C.-Y., Yap X.-S., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–15.
260
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Analysis of the relationship between citation frequency of patents and diversity of their backward citations for Japanese patents. Yoshikane F., Suzuki Y., Tsuji K., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–13.
Thailand’s plant protection regime: a case study in implementing TRIPS. P. Lertdhamtewe, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 186–193.
Delineating the scientific footprint in technology: Identifying scientific publications within non-patent references. Callaert J., Grouwels J., Van Looy B., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–16.
A special rule for compound protection for DNA-sequences: impact of the ECJ “Monsanto” decision on patent practice. Krauss J.B., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 189–206.
2.2. Patents
Are intellectual property rights human rights?: patent protection and the right to health. Hristova M.V., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 339–361.
2.2.1. Relating to life sciences and pharmaceuticals Patents and patients: Personalized medicine is at the heart of high court case. Walsh M., ABA Journal, 2011, 97 (DECEMBER), 18–19. The CJEU decision in Brústle v Greenpeace e.V. (C-34/10). Eyre D., Schlich G., CIPA Journal, 2011, 40 (11), 681–685. Can the SPC Regulation be rendered fit for purpose? The Court of Appeal refers more questions to the CJEU. Moss G., Smith R.L., European Intellectual Property Review, 2011, 33 (12), 771–779. Pharmaceutical patents, R&D incentives and access to new drugs: New ways of progress at the crossroad. Antonanzas F., Juarez-Castello C., Rodriguez-Ibeas R., European Journal of Health Economics, 2011, 12 (5), 393–395.
Patently obvious: why the District Court’s ruling in Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO is incomplete. Wall K., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 237–258. Stem cell patenting in the European Union. Cook T., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 73–75. MX: Reinventing patent law. Brinckerhoff C.C., Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry, 2011, 33 (11). Maintaining patents protecting biologics or small-molecule drugs. Marimuthu G., Kumari S., Kandasamy M., Raghunathan S., Saberwal G., Nature Biotechnology, 2012, 30 (1), 50–53.
European Court of Justice. ECJ 2011/11. Synthon BV v. Merz Pharma GmbH & Co. KGaA, 28 July 2011 (C-195/09). Baeyens A., Goffin T., European journal of health law, 2011, 18 (5), 572–577.
Theory of knowledge and biotech patents: Worlds apart?. Altamirano-Bustamante M.M., De Hoyos A., Olive L., Nature Biotechnology, 2011, 29 (11), 977–978.
Protecting diagnostic inventions in the U.S. Gass D.A., Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, 2011, 31 (15).
The patenting of polymorphs in the pharmaceutical industry and access to medicines. de Lima D.M.M., de Freitas da Silveira C.C., Physis, 2011, 21 (4), 1515– 1536.
Pharmaceutical patent protection and the introduction of generic drugs in Indonesia in the Post-TRIPS Era – Is patent law the only factor affecting the introduction of generic drugs?. Utomo T.S., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (7), 759–784.
Intellectual property cases reshaping biotech. Gwynne P., Research Technology Management, 2011, 54 (2), 5–6.
HGS v. Lilly: How soon is too soon to patent?. Siebrasse N., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 41–52.
A ban on stem cell patents in Europe? Rigby B., World Intellectual Property Report, 2011, 25 (12), 50–52.
Patent strategies for life sciences companies to navigate the changing patent landscape. Dykeman D.J., Abramson D.T., Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 2011, 17 (4), 358–364. Progress of the Indian pharmaceutical industry: a shifting perspective. P. Kamble, S. Ghorpade, R. Kshirsagar, and B. Kuchekar, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 48–51. Supplementary protection certificates for combination products: new combinatorics?. U.M. Gassner, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 52–60. Enforcement of screening method patents: the MedImmune case. A. Leathley and D. Owen, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 61–69. Patent term extensions for enantiomeric medicines: a global overview. C. Hayes, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 180–185.
A new formula for analyzing formulation-patent obviousness. Yin H., Temple Law Review, 2011, 83 (3), 829–855.
DNA as patentable subject matter and a narrow framework for addressing the perceived problems caused by gene patents. Schilling S.H., Duke Law Journal, 2011, 61 (3), 731–773. 2.2.2. Relating to software An evolutionary step in intellectual property rights – Artificial intelligence and intellectual property. Davies C.R., Computer Law and Security Review, 2011, 27 (6), 601– 619. Patent-eligible inventions after Bilski: History and theory. Sarnoff J.D., Hastings Law Journal, 2011, 63 (1), 53–125. Nonobviousness standards for hardware and software before and after KSR: what is the difference?. Murray M.F., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 259–286. Patents are not patents only: Turning point of characters in the semiconductor industry. Li Y.-T., Huang M.-H., Chen D.-Z., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 3, 6116910, 479–482.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Evaluation of the development potential of the information society in European union countries on the basis of patent activity in the ICT sector. Okon-Horodynska E., Wisla R., Sierotowicz T., Transformations in Business and Economics, 2011, 10 (2 A), 452–462. 2.2.3. Policy and strategic issues Strategic planning in the wake of the new prior art provisions in the America Invents Act. Flattery M.T., Raich W.B., CIPA Journal, 2011, 40 (12), 776–779. How to avoid filing catastrophes under the America Invents Act. Cubert J., Silverman E., Managing Intellectual Property, 2012.(216), 34–37. Selling patent rights and the incentive to innovate. Tauman Y., Weng M.-H., Economics Letters, 2012, 114 (3), 241–244. Intellectual Property and misappropriation of the public domain. Konglo T., European Intellectual Property Review, 2011, 33 (12), 780–794. The management of uncertainty and the patent incentive. Booton D., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 79–109. Publish or patent: Bibliometric evidence for empirical trade-offs in national funding strategies. Shelton R.D., Leydesdorff L., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 51 (14), DOI: 10.1002/ asi.21677. Patent law: harmonization in the age of globalization: the necessity and strategy for a pragmatic outcome. Dongwook C., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 127–166. Patent system measurements: Review, critique and proposal. Yang D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 7–19. Patent protection in the marine industry: International legal framework and strategic options. Mikalsen R., Harlfinger P., Roskilly A.P., Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2011, 225 (3), 232–241. Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Kim Y.K., Lee K., Park W.G., Choo K., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (2), 358–375. French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property. Gallie E.-P., Legros D., Research Policy, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/ j.respol.2011.12.008. Endogenous research and development and intellectual property laws in developed and emerging economies. Bagchi A., Roy A., Southern Economic Journal, 2012, 78 (3), 895– 930. Application research of SWOT analysis in enterprise patent portfolio strategy. Zeng J., Zhang H., Dong Y., Tan R., Yu F., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 418-420, 2219–2225. 2.2.4. Other patent topics A new mother of invention: After years of setbacks, patent reform finally makes it through. Seidenberg S., ABA Journal, 2011, 97 (DECEMBER), 16–17. The US patent system after the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
261
Gupta P.R., Feerst A., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 60–63. US adopts landmark patent reform legislation. Cochran D.B. et al., World Intellectual Property Report, 2011, 25 (11), 47–52. U.S. moves to first-inventor-to-file patent system, impact uncertain. Redmond K., MRS Bulletin, 2011, 36 (12), 959–960. Practical patent portfolio strategies for the America Invents Act. Van Gieson E., Intellectual Asset Magazine, 2012.(51), 31–36. Essential patents and standard dynamics. Baron J., Blind K., Pohlmann T., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083600. Firms’ cooperative activities as driving factors of patent declaration on technological standards. Pohlmann T., Blind K., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083617. An analysis of the achievements of JST operations through scientific patenting: Linkage between patents and scientific papers. Jibu M., 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy: Building Capacity for Scientific Innovation and Outcomes, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ACSIP.2011.6064473. The forecast model of patents granted in colleges based on genetic neural network. Zang X., Niu Y., 2011 International Conference on Electrical and Control Engineering – Proceedings, 2011, 6057452, 5090–5093. Substance, procedure, and the divided patent power. Miller J.S., Administrative Law Review, 2011, 63 (1), 31–75. Operating in an Intellectual Property World: Knowledge Sharing among Plant Breeders in Canada. Galushko V., Gray R., Oikonomou E., Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011, DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2011.01235.x. Managing Public IP with Downstream Interfirm Research Spillovers. Gray R., Malla S., Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011, 59 (4), 475–491. The stay dilemma: Examining brand and generic incentives for delaying the resolution of pharmaceutical patent litigation. Herman M.R., Columbia Law Review, 2011, 111 (8), 1788–1832. Moving towards completing the European Patent System: an Overview of the draft Agreement on a Unified Patent Court. Tilmann W., ERA Forum, 2012, 1–15. The constitutional implications of the EU patent. Peers S., European Constitutional Law Review, 2011, 7 (2), 229–266. Periods and remedies under the EPC: Compliance of the EPC with the PLT: Part 2 – Re-establishment if rights. Mulder C., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (2), 87–94. Periods and remedies under the EPC: Compliance of the EPC with the PLT: Part 1 – Extension of periods and further processing. Mulder C., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 21–21. Linkages, contests and overlaps in the global intellectual property rights regime. Muzaka V., European Journal of International Relations, 2011, 17 (4), 755–776. Enhanced cooperation – A proper approach to market integration in the field of unitary patent protection?.
262
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Lamping M., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (8), 879–925.
Retrospective valuations of intellectual property. Wilson B.S., Journal of Technology Transfer, 2012, 37 (1), 124–133.
Patents, piracy and competition. Ann C., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (8), 877–879.
You can run, but you can’t hide: the expansion of direct infringement and the evisceration of preventative contracting in Maersk. Lerner M.Y., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 207–235.
Effect of firm variables on patent price. Sreekumaran Nair S., Mathew M., Nag D., IIMB Management Review, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.iimb.2011.12.004. Elves or trolls? The role of nonpracticing patent owners in the innovation economy. Geradin D., Layne-farrar A., Padilla A.J., Industrial and Corporate Change, 2012, 21 (1), DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtr031, 73–94. The quality factor in patent systems. Van pottelsberghe de la potterie B., Industrial and Corporate Change, 2011, 20 (6), DOI: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2011.07.002, 1755– 1793. Patent pool formation: Timing matters. Leveque F., Meniere Y., Information Economics and Policy, 2011, 23 (41002), 243–251. Comparing some aspects of American and Canadian patent litigation. Rothstein M., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 53–60. Seducing the Goose: A review of patenting by UK universities. MacDonald S., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2011.(4), 323–344. Patenting in the shadow of independent discoveries by rivals. Zhang T., International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2012, 30 (1), 41–49. Willful patent infringement and enhanced damages after in re Seagate: An empirical study. Seaman C.B., Iowa Law Review, 2012, 97 (2), 417–471. Knowledge disclosure as intellectual property rights protection. Ponce C.J., Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2011, 80 (3), 418–434. Endogenous network formation in patent contests and its role as a barrier to entry. Marinucci M., Vergote W., Journal of Industrial Economics, 2011, 59 (4), 529–551. On the road to commercialization of patents in India. S.K. Sreedharan, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 112–118. Academic dilemma? Antipodean and New World directions on the ownership of inventions. D.B. Cox, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 135–145. What is the standard of review for patent litigation in Canada?. E.A. Crowne, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 205–210. Do patents matter for commercialization?. Webster E., Jensen P.H., Journal of Law and Economics, 2011, 54 (2), 431–453. Patents and quality growth in OLG economy. Sorek G., Journal of Macroeconomics, 2011, 33 (4), 690–699. Innovation trends in NAFTA countries: An econometric analysis of patent applications. Rodriguez J.C., Gomez M., Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 2011, 6 (3), 116–125.
Claim preambles: unnecessary matters of chance and confusion. Hartung K.M., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 330–338. The integrity of Section 101: a “new and useful” test for patentable subject matter. Klein D.J., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 287–329. Changes and challenges in using the formality examination for utility models in Taiwan. Chen R., Hwang C.-R., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 20–26. Patent monopoly and doctrine of exhaustion: Limits on exclusive right. Himanshu V.K., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 453–462. The role of Europe in the development of related rights laws. Cook T., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 516– 518. Navigate written description post-Ariad. Marandett E., Flynn K., Popkave D.L., Managing Intellectual Property, 2011.(215), 50–53. The accession insight and patent infringement remedies. Lee P., Michigan Law Review, 2011, 110 (2), 175–242. Funding and performance at the US Patent and Trademark Office. Hegde D., Nature Biotechnology, 2012, 30 (2), 148–150. On the price elasticity of demand for patents. de Rassenfosse G., van Pottelsberghe de La Potterie B., Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2012, 74 (1), 58–77. Numerical patent analysis with the fuzzy pay-off method: Valuing a compound real option. Collan M., Fuller R., Wang X., Mezei J., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Business Intelligence and Financial Engineering, 2011, 6121167, 405–409. Impact of IPR system on patent based innovation in China: Empirical studies over Chinese patent reform in 2000. Chen X., Ha N., Niu X., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 2, 6116759, 318–323. Research on proprietary intellectual property rights proliferation mechanism based on weak restraint supposition. Duan Y., Song W., Peng X., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6114630, 26–30. Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: An institutional view. Li X., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 236–249. Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?. Nemet G.F., Johnson E., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 190–200. Filing behaviour regarding essential patents in industry standards. Berger F., Blind K., Thumm N., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 216–225.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Understanding the technology market for patents: New insights from a licensing survey of Japanese firms. Kani M., Motohashi K., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 226–235. Spatial differences in the quality of university patenting: Do regions matter?. Acosta M., Coronado D., Martinez M.A., Research Policy, 2012, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.01.002. Arming for a patent war. Gobble M.M., Research Technology Management, 2011, 54 (6), 2–3. North-South models of intellectual property rights: an empirical critique. Park W.G., Review of World Economics, 2011, 1–30. The non-obviousness requirement in the Chilean patent law: A critical assessment. Fernandez F., Revista Chilena de Derecho, 2011, 38 (3), 487–510. Patenting and the Gender Gap: Should Women Be Encouraged to Patent More?. de Melo-Martin I., Science and Engineering Ethics, 2011, 1–14. Organizational and individual determinants of patent production of academic scientists and engineers in the United States. Huang W.-L., Feeney M.K., Welch E.W., Science and Public Policy, 2011, 38 (6), 463–479. The development of information-education materials for systems of distance learning: “Protection of Intellectual Property,” an example of a course of study. Vasilenko E.A., Meshcheryakova T.V., Kol’tsova E.M., Dikaya E.A., Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 2011, 38 (3),193–200. Measuring the effect of M&A on patenting quantity and quality. Valentini G., Strategic Management Journal, 2012, 33 (3), 336–346. Predicting patent litigation. Chien C.V., Texas Law Review, 2012, 90 (2), 283–329. On predicting patent litigation. Petherbridge L., Texas Law Review, 2012, 90 (2), 75–86. Whose right is it anyway?: The evisceration of an infringer’s Seventh Amendment right in patent litigation. Beane D.C., University of Illinois Law Review, 2011, 2011 (5), 1853– 1884. Patent inflation. Masur J., Yale Law Journal, 2011, 121 (3), 470–532.
263
Demerara sugar: A bitter pill to swallow?. Gangjee D.S., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 1–14. Exploring the roots of European Dilution. Fhima I.S., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2012.(1), 25–36. Trade marks that are contrary to public policy or morality: The search for the right-thinking man. Anil S., Grace B.Y-A., Zeng C.J., Yi K.L., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2012.(1), 39–63. Odysseus between Scylla and Charybdis? The ECJ rules in L’Oréal v eBay. B. Clark and M. Schubert, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2011, 6 (12), 880–888. Pre- and post- geographical indications registration measures for handicrafts in India. Kulkarni V., Konde V., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 463–469. Magical Thinking in Trademark Law. Assaf K., Law and Social Inquiry, 2011, DOI: 10.1111/j.17474469.2011.01271.x. The role of creativity in trademark law. Fromer J.C., Notre Dame Law Review, 2011, 86 (5), 1885–1920. Considerations regarding the recognition, the evaluation, and the amortisation of the trademarks as intangible assets presented in the balance sheets. Victor M., Elena A.A., Daciana I.I., Narcisa C.I., Proceedings of the World Multiconference on Applied Economics, Business and Development, 2011, 127–132. The protection of Geographical Indications in Pakistan. Ali M.H., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2011, 14 (6), 467–476. TRIPS compatibility of Sri Lankan trademark law. Micara A.G., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2012, 15 (1), 51–72. Sex changes everything, but the trademark dilution revision act shouldn’t: V secret catalogue, Inc. V. Moseley and the burden of proof in trademark dilution actions. Horn G., Malm M., University of Cincinnati Law Review, 2011, 79 (4), 1583–1604.
2.3. Trademarks and domain names
2.3.2. Domain names A corpus-based insight into genre: The case of WIPO domain name arbitration decisions. Escudero L.M., Discourse and Communication, 2011, 5 (4), 375–392.
2.3.1. Trademarks Trademark infringement by domain name registrars. Vida S., Acta Juridica Hungarica, 2011, 52 (4), 341–347.
Sensible agnosticism: An updated approach to domain-name trademark infringement. Reed S.R., Duke Law Journal, 2011, 61 (1), 211–250.
An efficient architecture of decision support system for testing potential Geographical Indication in India. Ray S., Samaddar S.G., Keserwani P., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 403–408, 4476–4485.
Domain grabbing in Germany: limitations of trade mark protection and how to overcome them. L. Pechan, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 166–175.
The application of “functional equivalence” in trade mark translation. Wang Z., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 109, 669–674.
2.4. Designs
The trade mark with a reputation in EU Law – Some remarks on the negative condition " without due cause”. Di Cataldo V., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (7), 833–845.
Framework of design patent map systems based on dissimilarity from populace survey. Chen C.-C., Chen R., Dai T.-T., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 264 CCIS, 75–82. GA-based dissimilarity visualization engine for design patent map systems.
264
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Chen C.-C., Chen R., Wang D.-C., Dai T.-T., Proceedings of the 2011 11th International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems, 2011, 6122172, 595–600. 2.5. Other IP; general IP issues 2.5.1. Policy and strategic issues Are intellectual property rights compatible with Rawlsian principles of justice?. Murphy D.J., Ethics and Information Technology, 2012, 1–13. Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Acemoglu D., Akcigit U., Journal of the European Economic Association, 2012, 10 (1), 1–42. 2.5.2. Other IP issues Leveraging public funded research for India’s economic emergence: The role of IPR. Ray A.S., Saha S., 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy: Building Capacity for Scientific Innovation and Outcomes, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ACSIP.2011.6064483. Construction and evaluation of an feasible target system for industry cluster’s innovation ecosystem based on intellectual property rights. Liu Y., Huang Q.-Y., 2011 International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Control - Proceedings, 2011, 6068171, 3142– 3145. The incentive effect analysis of intellectual property strategy to autonomous technological innovation. Ren W., Zhang T., Li M., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 119, 417–425. Architecture and intellectual property. Singleton R., Architectural Research Quarterly, 2011, 15 (3), 294–296. Keeping cultures alive: archives and Indigenous cultural and intellectual property rights. Janke T., Iacovino L., Archival Science, 2011, 1–21. Factors affecting enterprise intellectual property rights. Dong S., China Communications, 2011, 8 (5), 173–178.
Bondy A., International Journal of Learning, 2011, 18 (1), 389– 400. Intellectual property rights protection and endogenous economic growth revisited. Penha Cysne R., Turchick D., Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.jedc.2011.12.005. Protection of traditional knowledge: Trade barriers and the public domain. Hansen D.R., Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A., 2011, 58 (4), 757–794. Compulsory licensing: For better or for worse, the done deal lies in the balance. Yang D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 76–81. North-south agreements on trade and intellectual property beyond TRIPS: An analysis of US bilateral agreements in comparative perspective. Escobar-Andrae B., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 477–499. TRIPS, WTO and IPR: Biodiversity protection – a critical issue. Nair M.D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 519– 521. Spillover effect of international trade and intellectual property rights protection. Kai Z., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6114620, 226–230. University intellectual property management situations and countermeasures analysis. Hua X., Xu D., Shan S., Proceedings – 2011 International Conference of Information Technology, Computer Engineering and Management Sciences, 2011, 4, 6113693, 69–72. Articles 7 and 8 of the TRIPS Agreement: A force for convergence within the international IP system. Slade A., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2011, 14 (6), 413–440.
Developing countries pursuit of an intellectual property law balance under the WTO TRIPS agreement. He J., Chinese Journal of International Law, 2011, 10 (4), 827–863.
A protocol for evaluating changing global attitudes toward innovation and intellectual property regimes. Scott G., University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 2011, 32 (4), 1165–1268.
Ontologies for intellectual property rights protection. Zhang X.M., Liu Q., Wang H.Q., Expert Systems with Applications, 2012, 39 (1), 1388–1400.
Services, open innovation and intellectual property. Paasi J., Rantala T., VTT Symposium (Valtion Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus), 2011 (271), 291–302.
Intellectual Property, Information Technology, Biomedical Research, and Marketing of Patented Products. Goldman D., Lakdawalla D., Handbook of Health Economics, 2011, 2, 825–872. Note fashioning a new look in intellectual property: Sui generis protection for the innovative designer. Loangkote L.T., Hastings Law Journal, 2011, 63 (1), 297–321. Ancient indigenous deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and intellectual property rights. Batt F., International Journal of Human Rights, 2012, 16 (1), 152–172. Indigenous knowledge, intellectual property and technology education.
2.6. Historical Contribution of historical Spanish inventions to the knowledge of olive oil industrial heritage. Rojas-Sola J.I., Castro-Garcia M., Carranza-Canadas M.d.P., Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2011.11.009. David Newton Crooked Thatch, East End, Hook Norton, Banbury OX15 5LG, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected]
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
World Patent Information journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/worpatin
Literature listing 1. Books 1.1. Recent reports and other monographs The “World Intellectual Property Report 2011 – The Changing Face of Innovation” Describes how ownership of intellectual property rights has become central to the strategies of innovating firms worldwide. http://www.wipo.int/econ_stat/en/economics/wipr/ WIPO’s World Intellectual Property Indicators 2011. Draws on data from national and regional IP offices, WIPO, the World Bank and UNESCO. http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/wipi/index.html Options for an EU instrument for patent valorisation Expert Group on IPR Valorisation, European Union, 2012. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/files/optionseu-instrument-patent-valorisation_en.pdf Handbook of quality procedures before the EPO The result of co-operation between the EPO and users, in particular the EPI and BusinessEurope. European Patent Office, 2012. http://www.epo.org/service-support/publications/procedure/ handbook.html Patent and Trademarks in China An overview of patents and trade marks, how to apply for them and how to enforce rights in case of an infringement. Nordic IPR Forum, 2012. http://www.nordicipr.com/Event.aspx?id¼640932 The ICC Intellectual Property Roadmap Business guide to key intellectual property policy issues worldwide. The International Chamber of Commerce, 2012. http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ip/id2950/index.html
1.2. Reviews are available as follows:
Reviewed by Scassa T., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 111–118. The Common Law of Intellectual property by Catherine W Ng, Lionel Bently, Giuseppina D’Agostino (Eds), Hart, 2010 Reviewed by Odell-West A., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2011.(4), 410–411. EU Intellectual Property Law by Trevor Cook, OUP, 2010 Reviewed by L. McDonagh, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2011, 6 (12), 915. US Patent Prosecutor’s Desk Reference by Joshua P. Graham and Thomas G. Marlow, OUP, 2011. Reviewed by D.Nelms, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 146. Clean Tech Intellectual Property: Eco-marks, Green Patents, and Green Innovation Eric L. Lane OUP, 2011 Reviewed by K.R. Srinivas, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 147–148. 2. Journals The listing in this issue includes entries found using SciVerse ScopusÔ, Elsevier’s abstract and indexing database which gives access to almost 18000 peer-reviewed titles from more than 5000 international publishers.
2.1. Search techniques, databases and analysis: classification: searcher certification 2.1.1. Search techniques, databases Document image retrieval using signature as query Shirdhonkar M.S., Kokare M.B., 2011 2nd International Conference on Computer and Communication Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ ICCCT.2011.6075200, 66–70.
European Patent Law: Towards a Uniform Interpretation by Stefan Luginbuehl, Centre for Intellectual Property Law, 2011 Reviewed by Jacob R., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 70–71.
Showcase: A database for standards and patents Bekkers R., Catalini C., Martinelli A., Simcoe T., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083601.
Patent practice in Japan And Europe by Bernd Hansen, Dirk Schüssler-Langeheine (eds), Wolters Kluwer, 2011 Reviewed by Takenaka T., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (2), 135–136.
A “flow” based method for knowledge mining and visualization of patents Sheng Q., Hou W., Wang X., Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2012, 127, 543–548.
Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patents, Trade-Marks, 2nd edition by David Vaver, Irwin Law, 2011
The mathematics of patent claim analysis Kacsuk Z., Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2011, 19 (4), 263–289.
doi:10.1016/j.wpi.2012.03.004
258
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
A hybrid collaborative filtering algorithm for patent domain Zhi L., Wang H., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 159 CCIS (PART 2), 1–6. IPC code analysis of patent documents using association rules and maps – Patent analysis of database technology Jun S., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 258 CCIS, 21–30. The development of a modified TRIZ Technical System ontology Prickett P., Aparicio I., Computers in Industry, 2012, DOI: 10.1016/ j.compind.2012.01.006. A framework for automatic TRIZ level of invention estimation of patents using natural language processing, knowledge-transfer and patent citation metrics Li Z., Tate D., Lane C., Adams C., CAD Computer Aided Design, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.cad.2011.12.006. Improving retrievability with improved cluster-based pseudo-relevance feedback selection Bashir S., Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/ j.eswa.2012.01.041. A three-phase method for patent classification Chen Y.-L., Chang Y.-C., Information Processing and Management, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.ipm.2011.11.001. A study on query expansion methods for patent retrieval Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 19–24. Automatic construction of a bilingual thesaurus using citation analysis Nanba H., Mayumi S., Takezawa T., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 25–29. Patent image retrieval: A survey. Hanbury A., Bhatti N., Lupu M., Morzinger R., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 3–7. Patent search using IPC classification vectors. Verma M., Varma V., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 9–12. PatOlympics: An infrastructure for interactive evaluation of patent retrieval tools. Lupu M., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 25–28. The status of retrieval evaluation in the patent domain. Lupu M., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 31–36. United we fall, divided we stand: A study of query segmentation and PRF for patent prior art search. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 13–17. Utilizing sub-topical structure of documents for information retrieval. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 75–78.
Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 1925–1928. Patent query reduction using pseudo relevance feedback. Ganguly D., Leveling J., Magdy W., Jones G.J.F., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 1953–1956. European research in the field of production technology and manufacturing systems: an exploratory analysis through publications and patents. Franceschini F., Maisano D., Turina E., International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2011, 1–22. Granulometry based detection of junction and end points in patent drawings. Bhatti N.A., Hanbury A., ISPA 2011 – 7th International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis, 2011, 6046624, 307–312. Effective query generation and postprocessing strategies for prior art patent search. Cetintas S., Si L., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 51 (14), DOI: 10.1002/asi.21708. An intelligent system for automated binary knowledge document classification and content analysis. Chiang T.-A., Wu C.-Y., Trappey C.V., Trappey A.J.C., Journal of Universal Computer Science, 2011, 17 (14), 1991–2008. Query phrase expansion using Wikipedia in patent class search. Al-Shboul B., Myaeng S.-H., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011, 7097 LNCS, 115–126. PatentRank: An ontology-based approach to patent search. Li M., Zheng H.-T., Jiang Y., Xia S.-T., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011, 7063 LNCS (PART 2), 399–405. English-to-Chinese translation for technical terms based on improved mutual information. Lin X., Jiang D., Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 2011, 121 LNEE, 519–525. Circulation of collective intelligence through patents: An early progress report. Koiti H., Hidetsugu N., Takashi I., Makoto I., Taiichi H., Atsushi F., Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011, 27, 113–121. Identifying bilingual synonymous technical terms from phrase tables and parallel patent sentences. Liang B., Utsuro T., Yamamoto M., Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011, 27, 50–60. Graphics/image retrieval method. Li S.-A., Chen S.-Y., Su S., Duh D.-J., Li S., Proceedings – 2011 Conference on Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2011, 6120714, 19–24. Research on element sub-sentence in Chinese-English patent machine translation. Liu Z., Jin Y., Chi Y., Proceedings – 2011 International Conference on Asian Language Processing, 2011, 6121501, 193–196.
4th International Workshop on Patent Information Retrieval (PaIR’11). Lupu M., Hanbury A., Rauber A., International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 2011, 2623–2624.
Keyword elicitation for patent retrieval by using bibliographic information. Wang L.H., Li Y.R., Proceedings – 3rd International Conference on Data Mining and Intelligent Information Technology Applications, 2011, 6108420, 163–167.
An efficient method for using machine translation technologies in cross-language patent search.
Retrieval of patent documents from heterogeneous sources using ontologies and similarity analysis.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Taduri S., Lau G.T., Law K.H., Kesan J.P., Proceedings – 5th IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing, 2011, 6061369, 538–545. A rules and statistical learning based method for Chinese patent information extraction. Feng G., Chen X., Peng Z., Proceedings -8th Web Information Systems and Applications Conference, Workshop on Semantic Web and Ontolog, Workshop on Electronic Government Technology and Application, 2011, 6093576, 114–118. A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis. Gerken J.M., Moehrle M.G., Scientometrics, 2012, 1–26. Do You Want to Be a Patent Searcher?. Simmons E., Searcher (US), 2011, 19 (10), 30. Which is the best search system in Asia. Jagalla C., Managing Intellectual Property, 2011,(215), 54–57. The technique of shape-based multi-feature combination of trademark image retrieval Zhang C., You F.-C., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 429, 287– 291. Trademark image retrieval algorithm based on SIFT feature. Jia S., Xiao N., Jie Z., Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 2012, 113 LNEE, 201-207. 2.1.2. Analysis and statistics A patent quality analysis for innovative technology and product development. Trappey A.J.C., Trappey C.V., Wu C.-Y., Lin C.-W., Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2012, 26 (1), 26–34. Innovation status and trends of Korea nano-sensor technology from a perspective of patent analysis. Zheng J., Lei X., Zhao Y., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 413, 7–10. Using patent data to explore technology trajectory and trends of shading device. Yu Y.H., Yi K.J., Yeng H.P., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 403408, 3402–3407. Research on the wind energy technology of Germany based on patent analysis. Lei X.-P., Liu R.-S., Zhao Y.-H., Zheng J., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 112, 715–723. Literature review of new industry development research based on patent. Wu F., Zhou Q., Huang L., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 106, 379–382. Dynamic relationships of knowledge creation activities in supply chains: Evidence from patent data in the US auto industry. Lin Y., Chen J., Chen Y., African Journal of Business Management, 2011, 5 (32), 12563-12576. Applications of genetic algorithm and text mining on technology innovation. Yoon B., Yang J., Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2012, 145, 287– 291. The use of patent databases to predict trends in the krill fishery. Foster J., Nicol S., Kawaguchi S., CCAMLR Science, 2011, 18, 135–144. Modeling and analyzing technology innovation in the energy sector: Patent-based HMM approach. Lee S., Lee H.-j., Yoon B., Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2011.12.002.
259
Diffusion of environmental technologies: a patent citation analysis of glass melting and glass burners. Goetzke F., Rave T., Triebswetter U., Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 2012, 1–29. Research on technological trajectories based on patent documents and related empirical study. Lu-Cheng H., Yan L., International Conference on Management Science and Engineering – Annual Conference Proceedings, 2011, 6070078, 988–993. The quality difference analysis between environmental patents and non-environmental patents in China. Chong-Feng W., International Conference on Management Science and Engineering – Annual Conference Proceedings, 2011, 6070135, 1401–1406. A patent analysis on advanced biohydrogen technology development and commercialisation: Scope and competitiveness. Olivo C., Lebedeva I., Chu C.-Y., Lin C.-Y., Wu S.-Y., International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2011, 36 (21), 14103–14110. Market and patent analysis of commercializing biohydrogen technology. Lai W.-H., Chen H.-Y., Chang F.-Y., Wu C.-C., Lin C.-Y., Huang S.-R., International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2011, 36 (21), 14049–14058. Modeling the region patent applications based on P-SVM and SA. Xu S., Tang T., Zhao H., Journal of Computers, 2011, 6 (12), 2541– 2545. The relationships between the patent performance and corporation performance. Chang K.-C., Chen D.-Z., Huang M.-H., Journal of Informetrics, 2012, 6 (1), 131–139. Backbone of technology evolution in the modern era automobile industry: An analysis by the patents citation network. Lin Y., Chen J., Chen Y., Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2011, 20 (4), 416–442. Applicability of patent information in technological forecasting: A sector-specific approach. Yoon B., Lee S., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 37–45. Research on competitive strategy in mobile communication with patentometrics. Shen J., Wang X., Gao J., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6115492, 324–327. Assessing the data processing innovations for inventory management with patent analysis. Shen C.-W., Cheng C.-C., Proceedings – 5th International Conference on New Trends in Information Science and Service Science, 2011, 2, 6093449, 324–327. The inventive activities and collaboration pattern of universityindustry-government in China based on patent analysis. Lei X.-P., Zhao Z.-Y., Zhang X., Chen D.-Z., Huang M.-H., Zhao Y.-H., Scientometrics, 2012, 90 (1), 231–251. Using the entropy-based patent measure to explore the influences of related and unrelated technological diversification upon technological competences and firm performance. Chen Y.-S., Chang K.-C., Scientometrics, 2012, 90 (3), 825–841. Mapping technological innovations through patent analysis: a case study of foreign multinationals and indigenous firms in China. Wong C.-Y., Yap X.-S., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–15.
260
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Analysis of the relationship between citation frequency of patents and diversity of their backward citations for Japanese patents. Yoshikane F., Suzuki Y., Tsuji K., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–13.
Thailand’s plant protection regime: a case study in implementing TRIPS. P. Lertdhamtewe, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 186–193.
Delineating the scientific footprint in technology: Identifying scientific publications within non-patent references. Callaert J., Grouwels J., Van Looy B., Scientometrics, 2011, 1–16.
A special rule for compound protection for DNA-sequences: impact of the ECJ “Monsanto” decision on patent practice. Krauss J.B., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 189–206.
2.2. Patents
Are intellectual property rights human rights?: patent protection and the right to health. Hristova M.V., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 339–361.
2.2.1. Relating to life sciences and pharmaceuticals Patents and patients: Personalized medicine is at the heart of high court case. Walsh M., ABA Journal, 2011, 97 (DECEMBER), 18–19. The CJEU decision in Brústle v Greenpeace e.V. (C-34/10). Eyre D., Schlich G., CIPA Journal, 2011, 40 (11), 681–685. Can the SPC Regulation be rendered fit for purpose? The Court of Appeal refers more questions to the CJEU. Moss G., Smith R.L., European Intellectual Property Review, 2011, 33 (12), 771–779. Pharmaceutical patents, R&D incentives and access to new drugs: New ways of progress at the crossroad. Antonanzas F., Juarez-Castello C., Rodriguez-Ibeas R., European Journal of Health Economics, 2011, 12 (5), 393–395.
Patently obvious: why the District Court’s ruling in Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO is incomplete. Wall K., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 237–258. Stem cell patenting in the European Union. Cook T., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 73–75. MX: Reinventing patent law. Brinckerhoff C.C., Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry, 2011, 33 (11). Maintaining patents protecting biologics or small-molecule drugs. Marimuthu G., Kumari S., Kandasamy M., Raghunathan S., Saberwal G., Nature Biotechnology, 2012, 30 (1), 50–53.
European Court of Justice. ECJ 2011/11. Synthon BV v. Merz Pharma GmbH & Co. KGaA, 28 July 2011 (C-195/09). Baeyens A., Goffin T., European journal of health law, 2011, 18 (5), 572–577.
Theory of knowledge and biotech patents: Worlds apart?. Altamirano-Bustamante M.M., De Hoyos A., Olive L., Nature Biotechnology, 2011, 29 (11), 977–978.
Protecting diagnostic inventions in the U.S. Gass D.A., Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, 2011, 31 (15).
The patenting of polymorphs in the pharmaceutical industry and access to medicines. de Lima D.M.M., de Freitas da Silveira C.C., Physis, 2011, 21 (4), 1515– 1536.
Pharmaceutical patent protection and the introduction of generic drugs in Indonesia in the Post-TRIPS Era – Is patent law the only factor affecting the introduction of generic drugs?. Utomo T.S., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (7), 759–784.
Intellectual property cases reshaping biotech. Gwynne P., Research Technology Management, 2011, 54 (2), 5–6.
HGS v. Lilly: How soon is too soon to patent?. Siebrasse N., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 41–52.
A ban on stem cell patents in Europe? Rigby B., World Intellectual Property Report, 2011, 25 (12), 50–52.
Patent strategies for life sciences companies to navigate the changing patent landscape. Dykeman D.J., Abramson D.T., Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 2011, 17 (4), 358–364. Progress of the Indian pharmaceutical industry: a shifting perspective. P. Kamble, S. Ghorpade, R. Kshirsagar, and B. Kuchekar, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 48–51. Supplementary protection certificates for combination products: new combinatorics?. U.M. Gassner, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 52–60. Enforcement of screening method patents: the MedImmune case. A. Leathley and D. Owen, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (1), 61–69. Patent term extensions for enantiomeric medicines: a global overview. C. Hayes, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 180–185.
A new formula for analyzing formulation-patent obviousness. Yin H., Temple Law Review, 2011, 83 (3), 829–855.
DNA as patentable subject matter and a narrow framework for addressing the perceived problems caused by gene patents. Schilling S.H., Duke Law Journal, 2011, 61 (3), 731–773. 2.2.2. Relating to software An evolutionary step in intellectual property rights – Artificial intelligence and intellectual property. Davies C.R., Computer Law and Security Review, 2011, 27 (6), 601– 619. Patent-eligible inventions after Bilski: History and theory. Sarnoff J.D., Hastings Law Journal, 2011, 63 (1), 53–125. Nonobviousness standards for hardware and software before and after KSR: what is the difference?. Murray M.F., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 259–286. Patents are not patents only: Turning point of characters in the semiconductor industry. Li Y.-T., Huang M.-H., Chen D.-Z., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 3, 6116910, 479–482.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Evaluation of the development potential of the information society in European union countries on the basis of patent activity in the ICT sector. Okon-Horodynska E., Wisla R., Sierotowicz T., Transformations in Business and Economics, 2011, 10 (2 A), 452–462. 2.2.3. Policy and strategic issues Strategic planning in the wake of the new prior art provisions in the America Invents Act. Flattery M.T., Raich W.B., CIPA Journal, 2011, 40 (12), 776–779. How to avoid filing catastrophes under the America Invents Act. Cubert J., Silverman E., Managing Intellectual Property, 2012.(216), 34–37. Selling patent rights and the incentive to innovate. Tauman Y., Weng M.-H., Economics Letters, 2012, 114 (3), 241–244. Intellectual Property and misappropriation of the public domain. Konglo T., European Intellectual Property Review, 2011, 33 (12), 780–794. The management of uncertainty and the patent incentive. Booton D., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 79–109. Publish or patent: Bibliometric evidence for empirical trade-offs in national funding strategies. Shelton R.D., Leydesdorff L., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 51 (14), DOI: 10.1002/ asi.21677. Patent law: harmonization in the age of globalization: the necessity and strategy for a pragmatic outcome. Dongwook C., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 127–166. Patent system measurements: Review, critique and proposal. Yang D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 7–19. Patent protection in the marine industry: International legal framework and strategic options. Mikalsen R., Harlfinger P., Roskilly A.P., Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2011, 225 (3), 232–241. Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Kim Y.K., Lee K., Park W.G., Choo K., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (2), 358–375. French firms’ strategies for protecting their intellectual property. Gallie E.-P., Legros D., Research Policy, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/ j.respol.2011.12.008. Endogenous research and development and intellectual property laws in developed and emerging economies. Bagchi A., Roy A., Southern Economic Journal, 2012, 78 (3), 895– 930. Application research of SWOT analysis in enterprise patent portfolio strategy. Zeng J., Zhang H., Dong Y., Tan R., Yu F., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 418-420, 2219–2225. 2.2.4. Other patent topics A new mother of invention: After years of setbacks, patent reform finally makes it through. Seidenberg S., ABA Journal, 2011, 97 (DECEMBER), 16–17. The US patent system after the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
261
Gupta P.R., Feerst A., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 60–63. US adopts landmark patent reform legislation. Cochran D.B. et al., World Intellectual Property Report, 2011, 25 (11), 47–52. U.S. moves to first-inventor-to-file patent system, impact uncertain. Redmond K., MRS Bulletin, 2011, 36 (12), 959–960. Practical patent portfolio strategies for the America Invents Act. Van Gieson E., Intellectual Asset Magazine, 2012.(51), 31–36. Essential patents and standard dynamics. Baron J., Blind K., Pohlmann T., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083600. Firms’ cooperative activities as driving factors of patent declaration on technological standards. Pohlmann T., Blind K., 2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/SIIT.2011.6083617. An analysis of the achievements of JST operations through scientific patenting: Linkage between patents and scientific papers. Jibu M., 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy: Building Capacity for Scientific Innovation and Outcomes, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ACSIP.2011.6064473. The forecast model of patents granted in colleges based on genetic neural network. Zang X., Niu Y., 2011 International Conference on Electrical and Control Engineering – Proceedings, 2011, 6057452, 5090–5093. Substance, procedure, and the divided patent power. Miller J.S., Administrative Law Review, 2011, 63 (1), 31–75. Operating in an Intellectual Property World: Knowledge Sharing among Plant Breeders in Canada. Galushko V., Gray R., Oikonomou E., Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011, DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2011.01235.x. Managing Public IP with Downstream Interfirm Research Spillovers. Gray R., Malla S., Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2011, 59 (4), 475–491. The stay dilemma: Examining brand and generic incentives for delaying the resolution of pharmaceutical patent litigation. Herman M.R., Columbia Law Review, 2011, 111 (8), 1788–1832. Moving towards completing the European Patent System: an Overview of the draft Agreement on a Unified Patent Court. Tilmann W., ERA Forum, 2012, 1–15. The constitutional implications of the EU patent. Peers S., European Constitutional Law Review, 2011, 7 (2), 229–266. Periods and remedies under the EPC: Compliance of the EPC with the PLT: Part 2 – Re-establishment if rights. Mulder C., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (2), 87–94. Periods and remedies under the EPC: Compliance of the EPC with the PLT: Part 1 – Extension of periods and further processing. Mulder C., European Intellectual Property Review, 2012, 34 (1), 21–21. Linkages, contests and overlaps in the global intellectual property rights regime. Muzaka V., European Journal of International Relations, 2011, 17 (4), 755–776. Enhanced cooperation – A proper approach to market integration in the field of unitary patent protection?.
262
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Lamping M., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (8), 879–925.
Retrospective valuations of intellectual property. Wilson B.S., Journal of Technology Transfer, 2012, 37 (1), 124–133.
Patents, piracy and competition. Ann C., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (8), 877–879.
You can run, but you can’t hide: the expansion of direct infringement and the evisceration of preventative contracting in Maersk. Lerner M.Y., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (2), 207–235.
Effect of firm variables on patent price. Sreekumaran Nair S., Mathew M., Nag D., IIMB Management Review, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.iimb.2011.12.004. Elves or trolls? The role of nonpracticing patent owners in the innovation economy. Geradin D., Layne-farrar A., Padilla A.J., Industrial and Corporate Change, 2012, 21 (1), DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtr031, 73–94. The quality factor in patent systems. Van pottelsberghe de la potterie B., Industrial and Corporate Change, 2011, 20 (6), DOI: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2011.07.002, 1755– 1793. Patent pool formation: Timing matters. Leveque F., Meniere Y., Information Economics and Policy, 2011, 23 (41002), 243–251. Comparing some aspects of American and Canadian patent litigation. Rothstein M., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 53–60. Seducing the Goose: A review of patenting by UK universities. MacDonald S., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2011.(4), 323–344. Patenting in the shadow of independent discoveries by rivals. Zhang T., International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2012, 30 (1), 41–49. Willful patent infringement and enhanced damages after in re Seagate: An empirical study. Seaman C.B., Iowa Law Review, 2012, 97 (2), 417–471. Knowledge disclosure as intellectual property rights protection. Ponce C.J., Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2011, 80 (3), 418–434. Endogenous network formation in patent contests and its role as a barrier to entry. Marinucci M., Vergote W., Journal of Industrial Economics, 2011, 59 (4), 529–551. On the road to commercialization of patents in India. S.K. Sreedharan, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 112–118. Academic dilemma? Antipodean and New World directions on the ownership of inventions. D.B. Cox, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (2), 135–145. What is the standard of review for patent litigation in Canada?. E.A. Crowne, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 205–210. Do patents matter for commercialization?. Webster E., Jensen P.H., Journal of Law and Economics, 2011, 54 (2), 431–453. Patents and quality growth in OLG economy. Sorek G., Journal of Macroeconomics, 2011, 33 (4), 690–699. Innovation trends in NAFTA countries: An econometric analysis of patent applications. Rodriguez J.C., Gomez M., Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 2011, 6 (3), 116–125.
Claim preambles: unnecessary matters of chance and confusion. Hartung K.M., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 330–338. The integrity of Section 101: a “new and useful” test for patentable subject matter. Klein D.J., Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, 2011, 93 (3), 287–329. Changes and challenges in using the formality examination for utility models in Taiwan. Chen R., Hwang C.-R., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 20–26. Patent monopoly and doctrine of exhaustion: Limits on exclusive right. Himanshu V.K., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 453–462. The role of Europe in the development of related rights laws. Cook T., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 516– 518. Navigate written description post-Ariad. Marandett E., Flynn K., Popkave D.L., Managing Intellectual Property, 2011.(215), 50–53. The accession insight and patent infringement remedies. Lee P., Michigan Law Review, 2011, 110 (2), 175–242. Funding and performance at the US Patent and Trademark Office. Hegde D., Nature Biotechnology, 2012, 30 (2), 148–150. On the price elasticity of demand for patents. de Rassenfosse G., van Pottelsberghe de La Potterie B., Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2012, 74 (1), 58–77. Numerical patent analysis with the fuzzy pay-off method: Valuing a compound real option. Collan M., Fuller R., Wang X., Mezei J., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Business Intelligence and Financial Engineering, 2011, 6121167, 405–409. Impact of IPR system on patent based innovation in China: Empirical studies over Chinese patent reform in 2000. Chen X., Ha N., Niu X., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 2, 6116759, 318–323. Research on proprietary intellectual property rights proliferation mechanism based on weak restraint supposition. Duan Y., Song W., Peng X., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6114630, 26–30. Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: An institutional view. Li X., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 236–249. Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?. Nemet G.F., Johnson E., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 190–200. Filing behaviour regarding essential patents in industry standards. Berger F., Blind K., Thumm N., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 216–225.
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Understanding the technology market for patents: New insights from a licensing survey of Japanese firms. Kani M., Motohashi K., Research Policy, 2012, 41 (1), 226–235. Spatial differences in the quality of university patenting: Do regions matter?. Acosta M., Coronado D., Martinez M.A., Research Policy, 2012, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.01.002. Arming for a patent war. Gobble M.M., Research Technology Management, 2011, 54 (6), 2–3. North-South models of intellectual property rights: an empirical critique. Park W.G., Review of World Economics, 2011, 1–30. The non-obviousness requirement in the Chilean patent law: A critical assessment. Fernandez F., Revista Chilena de Derecho, 2011, 38 (3), 487–510. Patenting and the Gender Gap: Should Women Be Encouraged to Patent More?. de Melo-Martin I., Science and Engineering Ethics, 2011, 1–14. Organizational and individual determinants of patent production of academic scientists and engineers in the United States. Huang W.-L., Feeney M.K., Welch E.W., Science and Public Policy, 2011, 38 (6), 463–479. The development of information-education materials for systems of distance learning: “Protection of Intellectual Property,” an example of a course of study. Vasilenko E.A., Meshcheryakova T.V., Kol’tsova E.M., Dikaya E.A., Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 2011, 38 (3),193–200. Measuring the effect of M&A on patenting quantity and quality. Valentini G., Strategic Management Journal, 2012, 33 (3), 336–346. Predicting patent litigation. Chien C.V., Texas Law Review, 2012, 90 (2), 283–329. On predicting patent litigation. Petherbridge L., Texas Law Review, 2012, 90 (2), 75–86. Whose right is it anyway?: The evisceration of an infringer’s Seventh Amendment right in patent litigation. Beane D.C., University of Illinois Law Review, 2011, 2011 (5), 1853– 1884. Patent inflation. Masur J., Yale Law Journal, 2011, 121 (3), 470–532.
263
Demerara sugar: A bitter pill to swallow?. Gangjee D.S., Intellectual Property Journal, 2011, 24 (1), 1–14. Exploring the roots of European Dilution. Fhima I.S., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2012.(1), 25–36. Trade marks that are contrary to public policy or morality: The search for the right-thinking man. Anil S., Grace B.Y-A., Zeng C.J., Yi K.L., Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2012.(1), 39–63. Odysseus between Scylla and Charybdis? The ECJ rules in L’Oréal v eBay. B. Clark and M. Schubert, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2011, 6 (12), 880–888. Pre- and post- geographical indications registration measures for handicrafts in India. Kulkarni V., Konde V., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 463–469. Magical Thinking in Trademark Law. Assaf K., Law and Social Inquiry, 2011, DOI: 10.1111/j.17474469.2011.01271.x. The role of creativity in trademark law. Fromer J.C., Notre Dame Law Review, 2011, 86 (5), 1885–1920. Considerations regarding the recognition, the evaluation, and the amortisation of the trademarks as intangible assets presented in the balance sheets. Victor M., Elena A.A., Daciana I.I., Narcisa C.I., Proceedings of the World Multiconference on Applied Economics, Business and Development, 2011, 127–132. The protection of Geographical Indications in Pakistan. Ali M.H., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2011, 14 (6), 467–476. TRIPS compatibility of Sri Lankan trademark law. Micara A.G., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2012, 15 (1), 51–72. Sex changes everything, but the trademark dilution revision act shouldn’t: V secret catalogue, Inc. V. Moseley and the burden of proof in trademark dilution actions. Horn G., Malm M., University of Cincinnati Law Review, 2011, 79 (4), 1583–1604.
2.3. Trademarks and domain names
2.3.2. Domain names A corpus-based insight into genre: The case of WIPO domain name arbitration decisions. Escudero L.M., Discourse and Communication, 2011, 5 (4), 375–392.
2.3.1. Trademarks Trademark infringement by domain name registrars. Vida S., Acta Juridica Hungarica, 2011, 52 (4), 341–347.
Sensible agnosticism: An updated approach to domain-name trademark infringement. Reed S.R., Duke Law Journal, 2011, 61 (1), 211–250.
An efficient architecture of decision support system for testing potential Geographical Indication in India. Ray S., Samaddar S.G., Keserwani P., Advanced Materials Research, 2012, 403–408, 4476–4485.
Domain grabbing in Germany: limitations of trade mark protection and how to overcome them. L. Pechan, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2012, 7 (3), 166–175.
The application of “functional equivalence” in trade mark translation. Wang Z., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 109, 669–674.
2.4. Designs
The trade mark with a reputation in EU Law – Some remarks on the negative condition " without due cause”. Di Cataldo V., IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2011, 42 (7), 833–845.
Framework of design patent map systems based on dissimilarity from populace survey. Chen C.-C., Chen R., Dai T.-T., Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2011, 264 CCIS, 75–82. GA-based dissimilarity visualization engine for design patent map systems.
264
Literature listing / World Patent Information 34 (2012) 257–264
Chen C.-C., Chen R., Wang D.-C., Dai T.-T., Proceedings of the 2011 11th International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems, 2011, 6122172, 595–600. 2.5. Other IP; general IP issues 2.5.1. Policy and strategic issues Are intellectual property rights compatible with Rawlsian principles of justice?. Murphy D.J., Ethics and Information Technology, 2012, 1–13. Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Acemoglu D., Akcigit U., Journal of the European Economic Association, 2012, 10 (1), 1–42. 2.5.2. Other IP issues Leveraging public funded research for India’s economic emergence: The role of IPR. Ray A.S., Saha S., 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy: Building Capacity for Scientific Innovation and Outcomes, 2011, DOI: 10.1109/ACSIP.2011.6064483. Construction and evaluation of an feasible target system for industry cluster’s innovation ecosystem based on intellectual property rights. Liu Y., Huang Q.-Y., 2011 International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Control - Proceedings, 2011, 6068171, 3142– 3145. The incentive effect analysis of intellectual property strategy to autonomous technological innovation. Ren W., Zhang T., Li M., Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 2011, 119, 417–425. Architecture and intellectual property. Singleton R., Architectural Research Quarterly, 2011, 15 (3), 294–296. Keeping cultures alive: archives and Indigenous cultural and intellectual property rights. Janke T., Iacovino L., Archival Science, 2011, 1–21. Factors affecting enterprise intellectual property rights. Dong S., China Communications, 2011, 8 (5), 173–178.
Bondy A., International Journal of Learning, 2011, 18 (1), 389– 400. Intellectual property rights protection and endogenous economic growth revisited. Penha Cysne R., Turchick D., Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.jedc.2011.12.005. Protection of traditional knowledge: Trade barriers and the public domain. Hansen D.R., Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A., 2011, 58 (4), 757–794. Compulsory licensing: For better or for worse, the done deal lies in the balance. Yang D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2012, 17 (1), 76–81. North-south agreements on trade and intellectual property beyond TRIPS: An analysis of US bilateral agreements in comparative perspective. Escobar-Andrae B., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 477–499. TRIPS, WTO and IPR: Biodiversity protection – a critical issue. Nair M.D., Journals of Intellectual Property Rights, 2011, 16 (6), 519– 521. Spillover effect of international trade and intellectual property rights protection. Kai Z., Proceedings – 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, 2011, 1, 6114620, 226–230. University intellectual property management situations and countermeasures analysis. Hua X., Xu D., Shan S., Proceedings – 2011 International Conference of Information Technology, Computer Engineering and Management Sciences, 2011, 4, 6113693, 69–72. Articles 7 and 8 of the TRIPS Agreement: A force for convergence within the international IP system. Slade A., The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2011, 14 (6), 413–440.
Developing countries pursuit of an intellectual property law balance under the WTO TRIPS agreement. He J., Chinese Journal of International Law, 2011, 10 (4), 827–863.
A protocol for evaluating changing global attitudes toward innovation and intellectual property regimes. Scott G., University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 2011, 32 (4), 1165–1268.
Ontologies for intellectual property rights protection. Zhang X.M., Liu Q., Wang H.Q., Expert Systems with Applications, 2012, 39 (1), 1388–1400.
Services, open innovation and intellectual property. Paasi J., Rantala T., VTT Symposium (Valtion Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus), 2011 (271), 291–302.
Intellectual Property, Information Technology, Biomedical Research, and Marketing of Patented Products. Goldman D., Lakdawalla D., Handbook of Health Economics, 2011, 2, 825–872. Note fashioning a new look in intellectual property: Sui generis protection for the innovative designer. Loangkote L.T., Hastings Law Journal, 2011, 63 (1), 297–321. Ancient indigenous deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and intellectual property rights. Batt F., International Journal of Human Rights, 2012, 16 (1), 152–172. Indigenous knowledge, intellectual property and technology education.
2.6. Historical Contribution of historical Spanish inventions to the knowledge of olive oil industrial heritage. Rojas-Sola J.I., Castro-Garcia M., Carranza-Canadas M.d.P., Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2011, DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2011.11.009. David Newton Crooked Thatch, East End, Hook Norton, Banbury OX15 5LG, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected]