IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/8183.html

Intellectual Property as a Bargaining Environment

In: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 9

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Farrell

Abstract

Intellectual property policy relies on bargaining in the shadow of exclusivity. But bargaining is generically less than fully efficient, and the bargaining that would be needed to reach efficient arrangements in the shadow of exclusivity may be especially difficult in certain ways. I explore these issues and illustrate with brief discussions of patent pools and standards organizations, among others.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Farrell, 2009. "Intellectual Property as a Bargaining Environment," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 9, pages 39-53, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:8183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8183.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Chiao & Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2007. "The rules of standard-setting organizations: an empirical analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 905-930, December.
    2. Yarrow, George K, 1985. "Shareholder Protection, Compulsory Acquisition and the Efficiency of the Takeover Process," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 3-16, September.
    3. Ilya Segal, 1999. "Contracting with Externalities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 337-388.
    4. Ilya Segal & Michael D. Whinston, 2000. "Exclusive Contracts and Protection of Investments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 603-633, Winter.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 2008. "How Strong Are Weak Patents?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1347-1369, September.
    6. Kitch, Edmund W, 1977. "The Nature and Function of the Patent System," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 265-290, October.
    7. Michael D. Whinston & Ilya R. Segal, 2000. "Naked Exclusion: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 296-309, March.
    8. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. David Spector, 2011. "Exclusive contracts and demand foreclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(4), pages 619-638, December.
    2. Mikko Packalen, 2011. "Market Share Exclusion," Working Papers 1103, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2011.
    3. 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.
    4. repec:osf:socarx:qzmf8_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    6. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Picard, Pierre M. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "Patent office governance and patent examination quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 14-25.
    8. Heijmans, Roweno J.R.K. & Suetens, Sigrid, 2025. "Comparing Subsidies to Solve Coordination Failure," Discussion Papers 2025/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    9. Fadairo, Muriel & Yu, Jianyu & Lanchimba, Cintya, 2017. "The Choice of Exclusive Dealing: Economic Rationales and Evidence from French Retail Chains," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(3), pages 317-335.
    10. Roland Kirstein & Birgit Will, 2006. "Efficient compensation for employees' inventions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 129-148, April.
    11. Lee, Frances (Zhiyun Xu), 2013. "Trading between agents for a better match," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 501-515.
    12. 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.
    13. Chen, Chia-Wen, 2014. "Estimating the foreclosure effect of exclusive dealing: Evidence from the entry of specialty beer producers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 47-64.
    14. Mathias Dewatripont & Patrick Legros, 2013. "‘Essential’ Patents, FRAND Royalties and Technological Standards," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 913-937, December.
    15. Ehud Guttel & Shmuel Leshem, 2011. "Buying the Right to Harm: The Economics of Buyouts," CAE Working Papers 93, Aix-Marseille Université, CERGAM.
    16. Miklós-Thal, Jeanine & Shaffer, Greg, 2017. "Private contracting with externalities: Divide and conquer?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 460-472.
    17. Jay Pil Choi, 2003. "Pools and Cross-Licensing in the Shadow of Patent Litigation," CESifo Working Paper Series 1070, CESifo.
    18. Bhaven Sampat & Heidi L. Williams, 2019. "How Do Patents Affect Follow-On Innovation? Evidence from the Human Genome," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(1), pages 203-236, January.
    19. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Carl Shapiro, 2008. "Patent Reform: Aligning Reward and Contribution," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 8, pages 111-156, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Myeonghwan Cho & Sangwon Park, 2026. "When can an outsider bribe voters one by one at a negligible cost?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 66(2), pages 513-547, March.

    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:nbr:nberch:8183. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.