IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diceop/36.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ökonomische Auswirkungen der Einführung eines Leistungsschutzrechts für Presseinhalte im Internet (Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger)

Author

Listed:
  • Dewenter, Ralf
  • Haucap, Justus

Abstract

Gegenstand des Gutachtens ist die Analyse der Auswirkungen eines Leistungsschutzrechtes für digitale Presseinhalte im Internet (Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger) aus ökonomischer Perspektive. Hintergrund ist das Vorhaben der Bundesregierung, ein solches Leistungsschutzrecht noch in dieser Legislaturperiode einzuführen. Die erste Lesung zu dem geplanten Gesetzesvorhaben hat nun am 28. November 2012 stattgefunden (Deutscher Bundestag, 2012a). Das Gesetz soll im ersten Quartal 2013 verabschiedet werden.

Suggested Citation

  • Dewenter, Ralf & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Ökonomische Auswirkungen der Einführung eines Leistungsschutzrechts für Presseinhalte im Internet (Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger)," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 36, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diceop:36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/68484/1/73508064X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1993. "A Simple Theory of Advertising as a Good or Bad," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 941-964.
    2. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2014. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 10.
    3. Claude Crampes & Carole Haritchabalet & Bruno Jullien, 2005. "Advertising, Competition and Entry in Media Industries," CESifo Working Paper Series 1591, CESifo Group Munich.
    4. 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.
    5. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    6. Peitz, Martin & Valletti, Tommaso M., 2008. "Content and advertising in the media: Pay-tv versus free-to-air," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 949-965, July.
    7. Andrea Beyer & Hanno Beck, 2008. "Brauchen wir ein öffentlich-rechtliches Angebot im Internet?," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;German National Library of Economics, vol. 88(6), pages 391-397, June.
    8. E. Glen Weyl, 2010. "A Price Theory of Multi-sided Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1642-1672, September.
    9. David Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2007. "The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two-Sided Platforms," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 3.
    10. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    11. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Didier Laussel & Nathalie Sonnac, 2004. "Programming and Advertising Competition in the Broadcasting Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 657-669, December.
    12. Michael Spence & Bruce Owen, 1977. "Television Programming, Monopolistic Competition, and Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 91(1), pages 103-126.
    13. Kaiser Ulrich, 2006. "Magazines and their Companion Websites: Competing Outlet Channels?," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-26, August.
    14. Kaiser, Ulrich & Song, Minjae, 2009. "Do media consumers really dislike advertising? An empirical assessment of the role of advertising in print media markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 292-301, March.
    15. Dewenter, Ralf, 2006. "Das Konzept der zweiseitigen Maerkte am Beispiel von Zeitungsmonopolen," Working Paper 53/2006, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    16. Kenneth E. Train, 1991. "Optimal Regulation: The Economic Theory of Natural Monopoly," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200848, January.
    17. 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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coenen, Michael & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Kommunal- statt Missbrauchsaufsicht: Zur Aufsicht über Trinkwasserentgelte nach der 8. GWB-Novelle," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 53, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    2. Haucap, Justus & Kehder, Christiane, 2014. "Stellen Google, Amazon, Facebook & Co. wirklich die marktwirtschaftliche Ordnung zur Disposition?," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 62, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    3. Haucap, Justus, 2015. "Ordnungspolitik und Kartellrecht im Zeitalter der Digitalisierung," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 77, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    4. Haucap, Justus & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2017. "Ordnungspolitik in der digitalen Welt," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 90, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).

    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:zbw:diceop:36. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/diduede.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.