A better copyright system? comparing welfare of indefinitely renewable copyright versus fixed-length copyright
This study models and simulates fixed-length copyright (FLC) and indefinitely renewable copyright (IRC) and compares their social welfare. Evidence is found suggesting that IRC has lower maximal social welfare than FLC does. This difference can be explained by the way copyright duration is determined. Copyright duration represents the balance between encouraging creation and reducing restrictions on the consumption of information products. Under FLC, copyright duration is chosen directly by legislation; under IRC, it is induced indirectly through a copyright fee. However, the imposition of a copyright fee distorts the behavior of creators and thus decreases social welfare.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 15 (2006)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/GEIN20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/GEIN20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1999. "The optimal life of a patent when the timing of innovation is stochastic," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 827-846, August.
- Frank R. Lichtenberg & Tomas J. Philipson, 2002.
"The Dual Effects of Intellectual Property Regulations: Within- and Between-Patent Competition in the U.S. Pharmaceuticals Industry,"
Journal of Law and Economics,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(S2), pages 643-672.
- Frank R. Lichtenberg & Tomas J. Philipson, 2002. "The Dual Effects of Intellectual Property Regulations: Within- and Between- Patent Competition in the US Pharmaceuticals Industry," NBER Working Papers 9303, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Donald Wright, .
"Optimal Patent Breadth and Length with Costly Imitation,"
95/7, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Wright, Donald J., 1999. "Optimal patent breadth and length with costly imitation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 419-436, April.
- Michele Boldrin & David K Levine, 2002.
"The Case Against Intellectual Property,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
618897000000000003, David K. Levine.
- Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-86, June.
- Novos, Ian E & Waldman, Michael, 1984. "The Effects of Increased Copyright Protection: An Analytic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(2), pages 236-46, April.
- Johnson, William R, 1985. "The Economics of Copying," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(1), pages 158-74, February.
- Liebowitz, S J, 1985. "Copying and Indirect Appropriability: Photocopying of Journals," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 945-57, October.
- Yoon, Kiho, 2002. "The optimal level of copyright protection," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 327-348, September.
- Tuomas Takalo, 2001. "On the optimal patent policy," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 33-40, Spring.
- Waterson, Michael, 1990. "The Economics of Product Patents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 860-69, September.
- Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1989. "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 325-63, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:15:y:2006:i:6:p:519-542. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.