Cumulative Innovation, Experimentation and the Hold-Up Problem
AbstractExtending the basic model of two-stage cumulative innovation with asymmetric information to include `experimentation' by second-stage rms, we nd that the costs of a strong (versus weak) intellectual property (IP) regime may be substantially increased. In addition, these costs increase as experimentation becomes cheaper and as the differential between high and low value second-stage innovations grows, with the result that a weak IP regime is more likely to be optimal. Thus, technological change which reduces the cost of encountering and trialling new `ideas' implies a reduction in the socially optimal level of IP rights such as patent and copyright.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge in its series Cambridge Working Papers in Economics with number 0817.
Date of creation: Apr 2008
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/index.htm
Cumulative Innovation; Hold-Up; Experimentation; Intellectual Property.;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K3 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law
- L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
- O3 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2008-06-21 (All new papers)
- NEP-INO-2008-06-21 (Innovation)
- NEP-IPR-2008-06-21 (Intellectual Property Rights)
- NEP-KNM-2008-06-21 (Knowledge Management & Knowledge Economy)
- NEP-LAW-2008-06-21 (Law & Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2006. "Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Innovation," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews 321307000000000021, www.najecon.org.
- Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
- Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau & Katharine Rockett, 1996. "Optimal Patent Design and the Diffusion of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 60-83, Spring.
- Jerry R. Green & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1995.
"On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 20-33, Spring.
- Green, J.R. & Scotchmer, S., 1993. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1638, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Bessen, James, 2004. "Holdup and licensing of cumulative innovations with private information," Economics Letters, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 321-326, March.
- Pollock, R., 2009. "The Economics of Public Sector Information," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge 0920, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Howard Cobb).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.