IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nea/journl/y2014i21p111-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy: Seeking for a Better Balance

Author

Listed:
  • Shastitko, A.

    (Lomonosov Moscow State University, Department of Economics, Center for Competition and Economic Regulation Studies
    The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia)

  • Kurdin, A.

    (Lomonosov Moscow State University, Department of Economics, Center for Competition and Economic Regulation Studies
    The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

Competition policy and intellectual property rights (IPR) protection policy play a significant role in the innovation-based economic development. The authors of this work consider different combinations of these policies through the lens of discrete structural alternatives assuming opportunities for different regimes of IPR protection, as well as for antitrust. The analysis is focused on 4 main alternatives: strong and weak IPR protection, on the one hand, and two types of competition policy, based on a possible introduction of compulsory licensing, on the other hand. The result of the analysis shows that the introduction of compulsory licensing under a weak IPR protection weakens incentives for innovations.

Suggested Citation

  • Shastitko, A. & Kurdin, A., 2014. "Protection of Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy: Seeking for a Better Balance," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 21(1), pages 111-135.
  • Handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2014:i:21:p:111-135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econorus.org/repec/journl/2014-21-111-135r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Encaoua & Abraham Hollander, 2002. "Competition Policy and Innovation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 63-79, Spring.
    2. 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.
    3. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919, May.
    4. Paul L. Joskow, 2002. "Transaction Cost Economics, Antitrust Rules, and Remedies," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 95-116, April.
    5. John Vickers, 2010. "Competition Policy and Property Rights," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(544), pages 375-392, May.
    6. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit, 2012. "Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Competition And Innovation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, February.
    7. Beatrice Dumont & Peter Holmes, 2002. "The Scope Of Intellectual Property Rights and their Interface with Competition Law and Policy: Divergent Paths to the Same Goal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 149-162.
    8. A. Shastitko & A. Kurdin., 2012. "Antitrust Policy and Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Emerging Markets," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 1.
    9. Gilbert, Richard J & Weinschel, Alan J, 2005. "Competition Policy for Intellectual Property: Balancing Competition and Reward," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt76q6c9jh, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    10. Shastitko, A., 2011. "Errors of I and II Types in Economic Exchanges with Third Party Enforcement," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 10, pages 125-148.
    11. Ganslandt, Mattias, 2008. "Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy," Working Paper Series 726, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    12. Dennis W. Carlton & Robert H. Gertner, 2003. "Intellectual Property, Antitrust, and Strategic Behavior," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 3, pages 29-60, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Shastitko, Andrei, 2012. "Antitrust in Russia: to Be or not to Be?," Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, pages 50-69, June.
    14. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    15. Béatrice Dumont & P. Holmes, 2002. "The breadth of intellectual property right and their interface with competition law and policy : divergent paths to the same goal," Post-Print halshs-00069688, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jacob Seifert, 2015. "Welfare effects of compulsory licensing," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 317-350, December.
    2. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," 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 315-380, Elsevier.
    3. Pilar Beneito & Mar�a Engracia Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis, 2014. "Patents, Competition, and Firms' Innovation Incentives," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 285-309, May.
    4. Golovanova, S., 2013. "Competition Restriction Problem in the Markets Linked to the Markets of Essential Facilities," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 110-132.
    5. Chen, Yongmin & Pan, Shiyuan & Zhang, Tianle, 2014. "(When) Do stronger patents increase continual innovation?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 115-124.
    6. Gehl Sampath, Padmashree, 2006. "Breaking the Fence: Patent Rights and Biomedical Innovation in 'Technology Followers'," MERIT Working Papers 2006-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    8. Giovanni B. Ramello, 2002. "Copyright and Antitrust Issues," LIUC Papers in Economics 114, Cattaneo University (LIUC).
    9. Shastitko, Andrey & Golovanova, Svetlana, 2016. "Meeting blindly… Is Austrian economics useful for dynamic capabilities theory?," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 86-110.
    10. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    11. David Moroz, 2005. "Production of Scientific Knowledge and Radical Uncertainty: The Limits of the Normative Approach in Innovation Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, November.
    12. Wolfgang Kerber & Simonetta Vezzoso, 2004. "EU Competition Policy, Vertical Restraints, and Innovation: An Analysis from an Evolutionary Perspective," Marburg Working Papers on Economics 200414, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    13. Rosato, Antonio, 2008. "“Matching Auctions” for Hostile Takeovers: A Model with Endogenous Target," MPRA Paper 15083, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 07 Jan 2009.
    14. Flikkema, M.J. & Man, A.P. de & Wolters, M.J.J., 2010. "New trademark registration as an indicator of innovation: results of an explorative study of Benelux trademark data," Serie Research Memoranda 0009, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    15. Jochen Lorentzen & Peter Møllgaard, 2006. "Competition Policy and Innovation," Chapters, in: Patrizio Bianchi & Sandrine Labory (ed.), International Handbook on Industrial Policy, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Holmes, Peter, 2004. "The WTO and Domestic Regulation," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30630, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    17. Federico Etro, 2010. "Endogenous market structures and antitrust policy," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 57(1), pages 9-45, March.
    18. Giulio Federico & Fiona Scott Morton & Carl Shapiro, 2019. "Antitrust and Innovation: Welcoming and Protecting Disruption," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 125-190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Zigic, Kresimir & Maçi, Ilir, 2011. "Competition policy and market leaders," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1042-1049, May.
    20. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    competition policy; antitrust policy; compulsory licensing; intellectual property rights;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law

    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:nea:journl:y:2014:i:21:p:111-135. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.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 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: Alexey Tcharykov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.html .

    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.