Technological Knowledge As An Essential Facility
The economics of regulation has articulated the notions of essential facility and mandated interconnection Their application to the governance of technological knowledge can be fruitful es pecially when implemented by the adoption of the liability rule and the parallel reduction in the exclusivity of patents. Because knowledge is at the same time an output and an input in the production of new knowledge, exclusivity, traditionally associated to patents, is the cause of actual knowledge rationing with major drawbacks in terms of both static and dynamic efficiency. This institutional innovation can improve the governance of technological knowledge and increase both its rates of dissemination and generation.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.unito.it/|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004.
"Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Postgrant Opposition,"
in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 115-144
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J. H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff & David C. Mowery, 2004. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Law and Economics 0401002, EconWPA.
- Bronwyn H. Hall & Stuart J.H. Graham & Dietmar Harhoff, 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," NBER Working Papers 9731, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hall, Bronwyn H. & Graham, Stuart J. H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt4wq4g70r, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Hall, Bronwyn H. & Graham, Stuart J. H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2003. "Prospects for Improving U.S. Patent Quality via Post-grant Opposition," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt8fg5b6bs, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Shavell, Steven & van Ypersele, Tanguy, 2001.
"Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights,"
Journal of Law and Economics,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 525-47, October.
- SHAVELL, Steven & VAN YPERSELE, Tanguy, . "Rewards versus intellectual property rights," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1597, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Shavell, S. & van Ypersele de Strihou, T.P.M.C., 1999. "Rewards versus intellectual property rights," Discussion Paper 1999-26, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Steven Shavell & Tanguy van Ypersele, 1999. "Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights," NBER Working Papers 6956, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002.
"The Case Against Intellectual Property,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
- Kingston, William, 2001. "Innovation needs patents reform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 403-423, March.
- Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
- Richard R. Nelson, 2003.
"The Market Economy, and the Scientific Commons,"
LEM Papers Series
2003/24, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
- Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Atkinson, Anthony B & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1969. "A New View of Technological Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 79(315), pages 573-78, September.
- Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2002.
"Information and the Change in the Paradigm in Economics,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 460-501, June.
- Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2001. "Information and the Change in the Paradigm in Economics," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2001-8, Nobel Prize Committee.
- Antonelli, Cristiano, 2001. "The Microeconomics of Technological Systems," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199245536.
- Machlup, Fritz & Penrose, Edith, 1950. "The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 1-29, May.
- C. Antonelli, 2007.
"Localized Technological Change,"
in: Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 16
Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Antonelli, Cristiano, 2003. "Localized Technological Change," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200305, University of Turin.
- Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
- Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2000. "The Contributions of the Economics of Information to Twentieth Century Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1441-1478.
- J. Gregory Sidak & William Baumol, 1994. "Toward Competition in Local Telephony," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 52984, April.
- Mario Calderini & Giuseppe Scellato, 2004. "Intellectual property rights as strategic assets: the case of european patent opposition in the telecommunication industry," KITeS Working Papers 158, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Jul 2004.
- Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-18, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uto:labeco:200504. 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: (Piero Cavaleri)or (Marina Grazioli)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.