IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jindec/v58y2010i2p279-305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

PATENT DAMAGES AND SPATIAL COMPETITION -super-

Author

Listed:
  • MATTHEW D. HENRY
  • JOHN L. TURNER

Abstract

We analyze price competition between a spatially differentiated product patentee and an imitator anticipating probabilistic future patent damages. We compare the performance of three damage regimes. The 'reasonable royalty' regime, which yields symmetric equilibrium pricing, maximizes static welfare and yields the highest innovation incentives when patent enforcement is nearly certain. The 'lost profits' regime, which may deter infringement, yields the highest innovation incentives when patent enforcement is less-than-certain and products are sufficiently valuable. The 'unjust enrichment' regime yields low static efficiency and low innovation incentives. We offer new insights into the 'hypothetical negotiation' that courts use to construct reasonable royalties. Copyright 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. and the Editorial Board of The Journal of Industrial Economics.

Suggested Citation

  • 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, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:58:y:2010:i:2:p:279-305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-6451.2010.00416.x
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schankerman, Mark & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "Damages and Injunctions in Protecting Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 199-220, Spring.
    2. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    3. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 1986. "Fees Versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 471-491.
    4. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1986. "How to License Intangible Property," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 567-589.
    5. Sougata Poddar & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2004. "On Patent Licensing in Spatial Competition," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(249), pages 208-218, June.
    6. 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.
    7. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2007. "Finding "Lost" Profits: An Equilibrium Analysis of Patent Infringement Damages," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 186-207, April.
    8. Marjit, Sugata, 1990. "On a non-cooperative theory of technology transfer," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 293-298, July.
    9. Kamien, Morton I., 1992. "Patent licensing," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 331-354 Elsevier.
    10. 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.
    11. Choi, Jay Pil, 1998. "Patent Litigation as an Information-Transmission Mechanism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1249-1263, December.
    12. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2003. "Patents, Invalidity, and the Strategic Transmission of Enabling Information," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 151-178, June.
    13. Gregory Werden & Luke Froeb & James Langenfeld, 2000. "Lost Profits from Patent Infringement: The Simulation Approach," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 213-227.
    14. Choi, Jay Pil, 2009. "Alternative damage rules and probabilistic intellectual property rights: Unjust enrichment, lost profits, and reasonable royalty remedies," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 145-157, June.
    15. Claude Crampes & Corinne Langinier, 2002. "Litigation and Settlement in Patent Infringement Cases," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, pages 258-274.
    16. Reiko Aoki & Jin-Li Hu, 1999. "Licensing vs. Litigation: The Effect of the Legal System on Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 133-160, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Apurva Dey & Arun Kaushik & Rupayan Pal, 2017. "Probabilistic Patents, Alternative Damage Rules and Optimal Trade Policy," Working Papers id:11748, eSocialSciences.
    2. repec:eee:jeborg:v:137:y:2017:i:c:p:457-475 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bernhard Ganglmair & Luke M. Froeb & Gregory J. Werden, 2012. "Patent Hold-Up and Antitrust: How A Well-Intentioned Rule Could Retard Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, June.
    4. repec:eee:irlaec:v:52:y:2017:i:c:p:44-57 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Chen, Yongmin & Sappington, david, 2016. "An Optimal Rule for Patent Damages Under Sequential Innovation," MPRA Paper 73438, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:58:y:2010:i:2:p:279-305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-1821 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.