IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecj/econjl/v123y2013i567p131-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market Power in the Global Economy: The Exhaustion and Protection of Intellectual Property

Author

Listed:
  • Kamal Saggi

Abstract

This paper analyzes economic linkages between the exhaustion and protection of intellectual property. We consider a North-South model, where a firm that enjoys monopoly status in the North by virtue of an intellectual property right (IPR) -- such as a patent or a trademark -- has the incentive to price discriminate internationally because Northern consumers value its product more than Southern ones. The key intuition underlying the model is that while Northern policy regarding the territorial exhaustion of IPRs determines whether the firm can price discriminate internationally and therefore exercise market power across regions, Southern policy regarding the protection of IPRs determines the firm's monopoly power within the South. In equilibrium, each region's policy takes into account the firm's pricing behavior, its incentive to export, and the other region's policy stance. Major results are: (a) the North is more likely to prefer national exhaustion when the South does not protect IPRs whereas the South is more willing to protect intellectual property if the North chooses national exhaustion; (b) the firm values protection of intellectual property relatively more than the freedom to price discriminate internationally that exists under national exhaustion if and only if the quality gap between it and Southern imitators lies below a certain threshold; (c) except for the situation where the firm sells in the South regardless of the global policy environment, the two regions find themselves in a policy stand-off wherein each region takes into account whether or not the other would be willing to implement its less preferred policy to induce the firm to export and (d) requiring the South to protect IPRs increases global welfare iff (i) it induces the North to reverse its policy stance from national to international exhaustion and (ii) the quality gap between the Northern original and the Southern imitation exceeds a certain minimum threshold.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Kamal Saggi, 2013. "Market Power in the Global Economy: The Exhaustion and Protection of Intellectual Property," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(567), pages 131-161, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:123:y:2013:i:567:p:131-161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Jeong-Yeon & Mansfield, Edwin, 1996. "Intellectual Property Protection and U.S. Foreign Direct Investment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 181-186, May.
    2. Malueg, David A. & Schwartz, Marius, 1994. "Parallel imports, demand dispersion, and international price discrimination," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 167-195, November.
    3. Keith E. Maskus, 2000. "Parallel Imports," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(9), pages 1269-1284, September.
    4. Szymanski, Stefan & Valletti, Tommaso, 2005. "Parallel Trade, International Exhaustion and Intellectual Property Rights: A Welfare Analysis," CEPR Discussion Papers 5022, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Tommaso M. Valletti & Stefan Szymanski, 2006. "PARALLEL TRADE, INTERNATIONAL EXHAUSTION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: A WELFARE ANALYSIS -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 499-526, December.
    6. Valletti, Tommaso M., 2006. "Differential pricing, parallel trade, and the incentive to invest," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 314-324, September.
    7. Varian, Hal R, 1985. "Price Discrimination and Social Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 870-875, September.
    8. Smarzynska Javorcik, Beata, 2004. "The composition of foreign direct investment and protection of intellectual property rights: Evidence from transition economies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 39-62, February.
    9. Panle Gia & Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Shubham Chaudhuri, 2006. "Estimating the Effects of Global Patent Protection in Pharmaceuticals: A Case Study of Quinolones in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1477-1514, December.
    10. Peter Nunnenkamp & Julius Spatz, 2004. "Intellectual property rights and foreign direct investment: A disaggregated analysis," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 140(3), pages 393-414, September.
    11. Richardson, Martin, 2002. "An elementary proposition concerning parallel imports," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 233-245, January.
    12. Gene M. Grossman & Edwin L.-C. Lai, 2008. "Parallel imports and price controls," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 378-402.
    13. Smith, Pamela J., 1999. "Are weak patent rights a barrier to U.S. exports?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 151-177, June.
    14. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 2010. "Alfred Marshall Lecture Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Developing Countries: The Case of Pharmaceuticals," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(2-3), pages 326-353, 04-05.
    15. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
    16. Jean O. Lanjouw, 2005. "Patents, Price Controls and Access to New Drugs: How Policy Affects Global Market Entry," Working Papers 61, Center for Global Development.
    17. Olena Ivus, 2011. "Trade-related intellectual property rights: industry variation and technology diffusion," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 201-226, February.
    18. Ivus, Olena, 2010. "Do stronger patent rights raise high-tech exports to the developing world?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 38-47, May.
    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. Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2014. "Acquisitions by Multinationals and Trade Liberalization," Discussion Paper 2014-006, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    2. Bennato, Anna Rita & Valletti, Tommaso, 2014. "Pharmaceutical innovation and parallel trade," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 83-92.
    3. repec:eee:inecon:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:68-84 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Olena Ivus & Edwin L.-C. Lai, 2017. "Patent Exhaustion Regime and International Production Sharing: Winner and Losers?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6644, CESifo Group Munich.
    5. repec:eee:inecon:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:235-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Kamal Saggi, 2016. "Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 16-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    7. Olena Ivus & Edwin L.-C. Lai & Ted Sichelman, 2017. "An Economic Model of Patent Exhaustion," CESifo Working Paper Series 6638, CESifo Group Munich.
    8. Geng, Difei & Saggi, Kamal, 2017. "International effects of national regulations: External reference pricing and price controls," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 68-84.
    9. Jenny X. Lin & William Lincoln, 2017. "Pirate’s Treasure," Working Papers 17-51, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:ecj:econjl:v:123:y:2013:i:567:p:131-161. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.