IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v44y2015i1p20-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who is afraid of pirates? An experiment on the deterrence of innovation by imitation

Author

Listed:
  • Engel, Christoph
  • Kleine, Marco

Abstract

In the policy debate, intellectual property is often justified by what seems to be a straightforward argument: if innovators are not protected against others appropriating their ideas, incentives for innovation are suboptimally low. Now, in most industries and for most potential users, appropriating a foreign innovation is itself an investment decision fraught with cost and risk. Nonetheless, standard theory predicts too little innovation. Arguably the problem is exacerbated by the sensitivity of innovators to fairness; imitators do get a free lunch, after all.

Suggested Citation

  • Engel, Christoph & Kleine, Marco, 2015. "Who is afraid of pirates? An experiment on the deterrence of innovation by imitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 20-33.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:1:p:20-33
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.07.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733314001413
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2014.07.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    2. Christoph Engel, 2008. "The Behaviour of Corporate Actors. A Survey of the Empirical Literature," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_23, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    3. Maria Montero & Martin Sefton & Ping Zhang, 2008. "Enlargement and the balance of power: an experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 69-87, January.
    4. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    5. Mukoyama, Toshihiko, 2003. "Innovation, imitation, and growth with cumulative technology," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 361-380, March.
    6. Ullberg, Eskil, 2010. "COORDINATING INVENTIVE AND INNOVATIVE DECISIONS THROUGH MARKETS WITH PRICES: A Experimental Study of Patent Markets with Transparent Prices," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 231, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    7. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    8. Suetens, Sigrid, 2008. "Does R&D cooperation facilitate price collusion? An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 822-836, June.
    9. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    10. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    11. Uwe Cantner & Werner Güth & Andreas Nicklisch & Torsten Weiland, 2009. "Competition In Product Design: An Experiment Exploring Innovation Behavior," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 724-752, November.
    12. Agnes Bäker & Werner Güth & Kerstin Pull & Manfred Stadler, 2011. "Creativity, Analytical Skills, Personality Traits, and Innovation Game Behavior in the Lab: An Experiment," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-056, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    14. Eskil Ullberg, 2010. "From Personal to Impersonal Exchange in Ideas: An Experimental Study of Patent Markets with Transparent Prices," Working Papers 1017, George Mason University, Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science.
    15. Zizzo, Daniel John, 2002. "Racing with uncertainty: a patent race experiment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 877-902, June.
    16. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    17. Philippe Aghion & Christopher Harris & Peter Howitt & John Vickers, 2001. "Competition, Imitation and Growth with Step-by-Step Innovation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(3), pages 467-492.
    18. Amy Diduch, 2010. "Patents and R&D: a Classroom Experiment," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 9(2), pages 67-83.
    19. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    20. Suetens, Sigrid, 2005. "Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in experimental duopoly markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 63-82, February.
    21. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    22. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    23. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    24. Sbriglia, Patrizia & Hey, John D, 1994. "Experiments in Multi-stage R&D Competition," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 291-316.
    25. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1991. "Innovation, Imitation, and Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 807-827, August.
    26. Charness, Gary, 2000. "Self-Serving Cheap Talk: A Test Of Aumann's Conjecture," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 177-194, November.
    27. Cary Deck & Nisvan Erkal, 2013. "An Experimental Analysis Of Dynamic Incentives To Share Knowledge," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1622-1639, April.
    28. Cornes,Richard & Sandler,Todd, 1996. "The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods, and Club Goods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521477185.
    29. Martin G. Kocher & Matthias Sutter, 2005. "The Decision Maker Matters: Individual Versus Group Behaviour in Experimental Beauty-Contest Games," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(500), pages 200-223, January.
    30. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    31. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1993. "Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262570971, December.
    33. Isaac, R. Mark & Reynolds, Stanley S., 1992. "Schumpeterian competition in experimental markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 59-100, January.
    34. Christoph Engel & Sebastian Kube & Michael Kurschilgen, 2011. "Can we manage first impressions in cooperation problems? An experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2011_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised May 2014.
    35. Christoph Engel, 2011. "When Is Intellectual Property Needed As A Carrot For Innovators?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 277-299.
    36. Greiner, Ben, 2004. "An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments," MPRA Paper 13513, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    37. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
    38. Damiano Silipo, 2005. "The Evolution of Cooperation in Patent Races:Theory and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 85(1), pages 1-38, July.
    39. Carl Davidson & Paul Segerstrom, 1998. "R&D Subsidies and Economic Growth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(3), pages 548-577, Autumn.
    40. Menell, Peter S. & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2007. "Intellectual Property Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 1473-1570, Elsevier.
    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. Marina Agranov & Anastasia Buyalskaya, 2022. "Deterrence Effects of Enforcement Schemes: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3573-3589, May.
    2. Santos Arteaga, Francisco J. & Tavana, Madjid & Di Caprio, Debora & Toloo, Mehdi, 2019. "A dynamic multi-stage slacks-based measure data envelopment analysis model with knowledge accumulation and technological evolution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(2), pages 448-462.
    3. Chao, Hong & Ho, Chun-Yu & Huang, Shaoqing & Qin, Xiangdong & Cong, Jiajia, 2019. "Partners or rivals? An experimental study of a two-stage tournament," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 288-310.
    4. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2023. "Case study research on innovation systems: paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Working Papers 65, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised 15 May 2023.
    5. Duffy, John & Ralston, Jason, 2020. "Innovate versus imitate: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 727-751.
    6. Oren Bar-Gill & Christoph Engel, 2020. "Property is Dummy Proof: An Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2020_02, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    7. Ivan D. Breslavsky, 2017. "Effect of Intellectual Property Policy on the Speed of Technological Advancement," Papers 1706.04518, arXiv.org.
    8. Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J. & Di Caprio, Debora & Tavana, Madjid & O’Connor, Aidan, 2017. "Innovation dynamics and labor force restructuring with asymmetrically developed national innovation systems," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 36-56.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engel, Christoph, 2014. "Social preferences can make imperfect sanctions work: Evidence from a public good experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 343-353.
    2. Christoph Engel, 2013. "Deterrence by Imperfect Sanctions – A Public Good Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_09, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    3. Cary Deck & Erik O. Kimbrough, 2017. "Experimenting with Contests for Experimentation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 391-406, October.
    4. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2011. "Oligopoly as a Socially Embedded Dilemma. An Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2011_01, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    5. Halbheer, Daniel & Fehr, Ernst & Goette, Lorenz & Schmutzler, Armin, 2009. "Self-reinforcing market dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 481-502, November.
    6. Urs Fischbacher & Simeon Schudy & Sabrina Teyssier, 2014. "Heterogeneous reactions to heterogeneity in returns from public goods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(1), pages 195-217, June.
    7. Christoph Engel & Lilia Zhurakhovska, 2013. "Do Explicit Reasons Make Legal Intervention More Effective? An Experimental Study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_16, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Mar 2018.
    8. Susmita Baulia, 2017. "Take-up of joint and individual liability loans: an analysis with laboratory experiments," Discussion Papers 117, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    9. Schmidt, Klaus M. & Fey, Lisa & Thoma, Carmen, 2017. "Competition and incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 111-125.
    10. Mathias Erlei & Anne-Kathrin Dimmig, 2012. "Quasi-Rational R&D Behavior in an Environment with Fundamental Uncertainty," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0008, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    11. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    12. Martin G. Kocher & Odile Poulsen & Daniel J. Zizzo, 2017. "Social preferences, accountability, and wage bargaining," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(3), pages 659-678, March.
    13. Gregorio Gim�nez, 2011. "Imitations, economic activity and welfare," Documentos de Trabajo dt2011-03, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    14. Marín, Alejandra & Laureiro, Daniela & Forero, Clemente, 2007. "Innovation patterns and intellectual property in SMEs of a developing country," Galeras. Working Papers Series 017, Universidad de Los Andes. Facultad de Administración. School of Management.
    15. Christoph Engel & Bettina Rockenbach, 2009. "We Are Not Alone: The Impact of Externalities on Public Good Provision," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2009_29, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised May 2011.
    16. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    17. Gabriele Camera & Cary Deck & David Porter, 2020. "Do economic inequalities affect long-run cooperation and prosperity?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 53-83, March.
    18. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.
    19. Vera Popva, 2010. "What renders financial advisors less treacherous? - On commissions and reciprocity -," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-036, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. Sabrina Teyssier, 2012. "Inequity and risk aversion in sequential public good games," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 91-119, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Imitation; Appropriation; Patent;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • L17 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Open Source Products and Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:1:p:20-33. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.