IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0284880.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subsidies versus intellectual property rights when innovators operate in two markets

Author

Listed:
  • Egle Skliaustyte
  • Matthias Weber

Abstract

Intellectual property rights are monopoly rights, which have undesirable welfare properties. Therefore, several studies suggest using rewards as incentives for innovation instead. However, these studies have thus far had little effect on actual policy, possibly because such rewards may be difficult to implement in practice. We suggest a new way of providing incentives to originators, which is easier to implement. Our suggestion can be used if there is an additional market in which originators operate, where copying is not easily possible. In this case, intellectual property rights in one market can be replaced by subsidies in the other market. Taking the music industry as example, copyrights in the records market could be replaced by subsidies in the market for live performances. We develop a partial equilibrium model that can be used to analyze in which cases the replacement of intellectual property rights in one market with subsidies in another market is welfare improving and better for the originator. A numerical application example suggests that the subsidy scheme may indeed be better in the music industry. The subsidy scheme can be implemented as a voluntary option, which would even be possible without changing the legal framework of intellectual property rights.

Suggested Citation

  • Egle Skliaustyte & Matthias Weber, 2023. "Subsidies versus intellectual property rights when innovators operate in two markets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(4), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0284880
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284880
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0284880&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0284880?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boldrin,Michele & Levine,David K., 2010. "Against Intellectual Monopoly," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521127264, June.
    2. Liam Brunt & Josh Lerner & Tom Nicholas, 2012. "Inducement Prizes and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 657-696, December.
    3. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    4. Gandjour, Afschin & Chernyak, Nadja, 2011. "A new prize system for drug innovation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 170-177.
    5. Alcalá, Francisco & González-Maestre, Miguel, 2010. "Copying, superstars, and artistic creation," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 365-378, December.
    6. Sumiko Asai, 2011. "Demand analysis of hit music in Japan," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 35(2), pages 101-117, May.
    7. Grinols, Earl L. & Lin, Hwan C., 2011. "Patent replacement and welfare gains," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1586-1604, September.
    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. repec:osf:socarx:x87fy_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Skliaustyte, Egle & Weber, Matthias, 2021. "Subsidies or Tax Breaks Versus Intellectual Property Rights: Dual Markets," SocArXiv x87fy, Center for Open Science.
    3. Armin Mertens & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Intellectual property and fourth industrial revolution technologies: how the patent system is shaping the future in the data-driven economy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 275-310, April.
    4. Fontana, Roberto & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Shimizu, Hiroshi & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2013. "Reassessing patent propensity: Evidence from a dataset of R&D awards, 1977–2004," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1780-1792.
    5. B. Zorina Khan, 2014. "Of Time and Space: Technological Spillovers among Patents and Unpatented Innovations during Early U.S. Industrialization," NBER Working Papers 20732, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Gideon Ndubuisi, 2024. "Patent Enforcement and Quality Upgrading of Exported Products," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 13979-14011, September.
    7. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    8. Douglas Hanley, 2014. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," Working Paper 533, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    9. Mark Schankerman & Florian Schuett, 2022. "Patent Screening, Innovation, and Welfare," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(4), pages 2101-2148.
    10. Nancy Gallini, 2011. "Private agreements for coordinating patent rights: the case of patent pools," ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2011(3), pages 5-30.
    11. Benoit, Jean-Pierre & Galbiati, Roberto, 2013. "Rational parasites," CEPR Discussion Papers 9351, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Michael Kremer & Heidi Williams, 2010. "Incentivizing Innovation: Adding to the Tool Kit," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 10, pages 1-17, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Onur Bayar & Thomas J. Chemmanur & Mark H. Liu, "undated". "How to Motivate Fundamental Innovation: Subsidies versus Prizes and the Role of Venture Capital," Working Papers 0175fin, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio, revised 06 Jan 2016.
    14. James Bessen, 2010. "Communicating Technical Knowledge," Working Papers 1001, Research on Innovation.
    15. Paolo CROSETTO, 2010. "To patent or not to patent: a pilot experiment on incentives to copyright in a sequential innovation setting," Departmental Working Papers 2010-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    16. Bento Pedro, 2021. "Quantifying the Effects of Patent Protection on Innovation, Imitation, Growth, and Aggregate Productivity," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 1-35, January.
    17. Ndubuisi, Gideon & Foster-McGregor, Neil, 2018. "Domestic intellectual property rights protection and the margins of bilateral exports," MERIT Working Papers 2018-035, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    18. Douglas Hanley, 2015. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," 2015 Meeting Papers 1491, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. 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.
    20. Nicholas, Tom, 2011. "Cheaper patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 325-339, March.
    21. Evrin, Alperen, 2013. "International Specialization in Research & Development," MPRA Paper 62392, 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:plo:pone00:0284880. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.