Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary between Antitrust Law and Patent Law
AbstractFor over a century, courts and commentators have struggled to find principles that reconcile patent and antitrust law, especially as to patent licensing. We interpret case law and commentary to arrive at three unifying principles for acceptable terms of license. Profit neutrality' holds that patent rewards should not depend on the rightholder's ability to work the patent himself. Derived reward' holds that the patent holder's profits should be earned, if at all, from the social value created by the invention. Minimalism' holds that licensing contracts should not contain more restrictions than are necessary to achieve neutrality. We argue that these principles largely rationalize important decisions of the twentieth century. They also justify the Supreme Court's controversial General Electric decision, which holds that patentholders can set prices charged by their licensees.
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 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 10546.
Date of creation: Jun 2004
Date of revision:
Note: LE PR
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Stephen M. Maurer & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2006. "Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary Between Antitrust Law and Patent Law," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 476-522.
- Stephen M. Maurer & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2004. "Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary Between Antitrust Law and Patent Law," Law and Economics 0407001, EconWPA.
- Maurer, Stephen M. & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2004. "Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary Between Antitrust Law and Patent Law," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt6f659351, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Stephen Maurer & Suzanne Scotchmer, . "Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary Between Antitrust Law and Patent Law," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1090, American Law & Economics Association.
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
- L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-06-13 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2004-06-13 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-LAW-2004-06-13 (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.:
- Carl Shapiro, 2003.
"Antitrust Limits to Patent Settlements,"
Law and Economics
- O'DONOGHUE, Ted & SCOTCHMER, Suzanne & THISSE, Jacques-François, .
"Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
-1314, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques-François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, 03.
- Paul Klemperer, 1990.
"How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
- Klemperer, Paul, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," CEPR Discussion Papers 392, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
- Gerlagh , Reyer & Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2008.
"Linking Environmental and Innovation Policy,"
10/2008, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
- Llobet, Gerard & Suarez, Javier, 2005.
"Financing and the Protection of Innovators,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
4944, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Gerlagh, Reyer & Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2014. "The optimal time path of clean energy R&D policy when patents have finite lifetime," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2-19.
- Matthew D. Henry & John L. Turner, 2010. "PATENT DAMAGES AND SPATIAL COMPETITION -super-* ," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 279-305, 06.
- Alberto BUCCI, 2004. "Economic growth in an enlarged Europe: the human capital and R&D dimensions," Departmental Working Papers 2004-22, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
- Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2005.
"Still Looking for Lost Profits: The Case of Horizontal Competition,"
Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series
qt5746p162, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2005. "Still Looking for Lost Profits: The Case of Horizontal Competition," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt45r7776m, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.