IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ptl/wpaper/58.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The doctrines and the making of an early patent system in the developing world: the Chilean case. 1840s-1910s

Author

Listed:
  • Bernardita Escobar

    (Facultad de Economía y Empresa, Universidad Diego Portales)

Abstract

This article analyses the creation of the first Chilean patent law (1840s-1920s), by examining the underlying doctrines and key actors (political and business people) in the making of one of the earliest patent systems in Latin America and the developing world. From three main doctrines supporting IP protection (natural rights, contractarian and utilitarian) the article identifies elements of the first, disregard for the second and some traits of the third doctrine in the law. Protection of „introductions‟, a non-contemporary IP subject matter, resulted from the mix of utilitarian and protectionist beliefs of policy makers, the influence of colonial regulation and a series of petitions for privileges made between 1830-40.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernardita Escobar, 2014. "The doctrines and the making of an early patent system in the developing world: the Chilean case. 1840s-1910s," Working Papers 58, Facultad de Economía y Empresa, Universidad Diego Portales.
    • Handle: RePEc:ptl:wpaper:58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.udp.cl/descargas/facultades_carreras/economia/pdf/documentos_investigacion/wp_58_Escobar_doctrines_making.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    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. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2024. "Patents, innovation, and development," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1-2), pages 17-42, March.
    2. Couyoumdjian, Juan Pablo & Larroulet, Cristián, 2018. "Ideas, leaders, and institutions in 19th-century Chile," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(5), pages 925-947, October.

    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. Raza, Werner G., 2021. "COVID-19 and the failure of pharmaceutical innovation for the global South: The example of "neglected diseases" and emerging infectious diseases," Briefing Papers 32a, Austrian Foundation for Development Research (ÖFSE).
    2. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    3. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "The Least developed countries' TRIPS Waiver and the Strength of Intellectual Property Protection," EconStor Preprints 271537, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Shiyuan Pan & Heng-fu Zou & Tailong Li, 2010. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 437, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    5. Lin, Jenny X. & Lincoln, William F., 2017. "Pirate's treasure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 235-245.
    6. Andreas Panagopoulos, 2004. "When Does Patent Protection Stimulate Innovation?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 04/565, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    7. Sunil Kanwar, 2006. "Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights," Working papers 142, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    8. 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.
    9. Ming Liu & Sumner LaCroix, 2011. "The Impact of Stronger Property Rights in Pharmaceuticals on Innovation in Developed and Developing Countries," Working Papers 201116, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    10. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    11. 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.
    12. Yang, Wei & Wang, Xueke, 2024. "The impact of patent protection on technological innovation: A global value chain division of labor perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    13. Kazutaka TAKECHI, 2012. "Negative Effects of Intellectual Property Protection: The unusual suspects?," Discussion papers 12057, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    14. Liu, An-Hsiang & Siebert, Ralph B., 2022. "The competitive effects of declining entry costs over time: Evidence from the static random access memory market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    15. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2009_041, December.
    16. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    17. Xing Gao & Keyu Zhai, 2018. "Performance Evaluation on Intellectual Property Rights Policy System of the Renewable Energy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Gaetan de Rassenfosse, 2024. "The Role of Patents: Incentivizing Innovation or Hindering Progress?," Papers 2412.14370, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2025.
    19. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2006. "Patents vs. Trade Secrets: Knowledge Licensing and Spillover," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(6), pages 1112-1147, December.
    20. Ming Liu & Sumner la Croix, 2013. "A Cross-Country Index of Intellectual Property Rights in Pharmaceutical Innovations," Working Papers 201313, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ptl:wpaper:58. 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: Enrique Calfucura The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Enrique Calfucura to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feudpcl.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.