|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
|
Issue of 2016‒03‒23
five papers chosen by Giovanni Ramello Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” |
| By: | Fink,Carsten; Maskus,Keith E.; Qian,Yi |
| Abstract: | Policy makers around the world recognize the potentially harmful consequences of trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy. Indeed, many countries have recently initiated policy reforms to strengthen the enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR). Further, minimum standards of enforcement have been incorporated in many international treaties, especially trade agreements. This emphasis on enforcement raises basic questions about the actual impacts of IP rights infringement, which differ across the types of IPR and economic sectors. The authors review the academic literature and other studies in the public domain to evaluate what has been learned about these socioeconomic effects, with an emphasis on developing countries where possible. They also identify important gaps in our understanding of the consequences of counterfeiting and piracy and develop recommendations on how governments might collect data and conduct studies to better inform IPR enforcement policy. |
| Keywords: | Debt Markets,E-Business,Economic Theory&Research,Labor Policies,Markets and Market Access |
| Date: | 2016–02–29 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:7586&r=ipr |
| By: | Petra Moser |
| Abstract: | A strong tradition in economic history, which primarily relies on qualitative evidence and statistical correlations, has emphasized the importance of patents as a primary driver of innovation. Recent improvements in empirical methodology – through the creation of new data sets and advances in identification – have produced research that challenges this traditional view. The findings of this literature provide a more nuanced view of the effects of intellectual property, and suggest that when patent rights have been too broad or strong, they have actually discouraged innovation. This paper summarizes the major results from this research and presents open questions. |
| JEL: | K0 K21 L51 N0 O30 O31 O34 |
| Date: | 2016–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:21964&r=ipr |
| By: | WAN, Yunyun |
| Abstract: | Facing generic competition, a brand-name drug company sometimes launches its own generic called an "authorized generic" (AG) through a third-party entity. If an authorized party transfers a substantial part of its profits to the brand-name drug company, the latter's total profit increases as a result and every branded drug that comes off the patent should have its AG version. However, in actual fact only a small proportion of branded drugs have AGs. To explain this puzzle, I develop a model that features switching costs due to the customer base a brand-name drug develops prior to generic entry. The model predicts that AGs are launched when switching costs to the generics are sufficiently low. I test this hypothess using prescription drug data and find strong support for it. |
| Keywords: | brand loyalty, authorized generics, generic entry, customer base, switching cost |
| JEL: | L13 L20 I11 |
| Date: | 2016–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hit:iirwps:16-01&r=ipr |
| By: | Adam B. Jaffe; Gaétan de Rassenfosse |
| Abstract: | The last two decades have witnessed a dramatic increase in the use of patent citation data in social science research. Facilitated by digitization of the patent data and increasing computing power, a community of practice has grown up that has developed methods for using these data to: measure attributes of innovations such as impact and originality; to trace flows of knowledge across individuals, institutions and regions; and to map innovation networks. The objective of this paper is threefold. First, it takes stock of these main uses. Second, it discusses four pitfalls associated with patent citation data, related to office, time and technology, examiner, and strategic effects. Third, it highlights gaps in our understanding and offers directions for future research. |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O34 |
| Date: | 2016–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:21868&r=ipr |
| By: | Möller, Marie |
| Abstract: | The increasing digitisation necessitates amendments to copyright protection. Both the European Parliament and the European Commission have now presented proposals addressing this issue. This is necessary because the way in which creative goods are produced and distributed has been changed dramatically by digital technologies and the spread of the internet. One challenge that arises from this is the application of the Country of Origin principle and the resulting practice of geo-blocking. The resale of digital good represents another challenge in this context. Individual stakeholders have different interests with regard to copyright protection in a digital economy. For example, consumers (private or institutional users) have an interest in the resale of digital goods, whereas suppliers (authors, collecting societies, publishers) do not. The EU Parliament's proposal for copyright reform sides more with the suppliers than with the consumers. Future policy at EU level should attempt to create a clear, comprehensible legal framework and thus establish legal certainty. |
| Abstract: | Die fortschreitende Digitalisierung macht Anpassungen des Urheberschutzes erforderlich. Sowohl das Europäische Parlament als auch die Europäische Kommission haben dazu inzwischen Vorschläge vorgelegt. Hintergrund ist, dass die Art, wie kreative Güter produziert und verbreitet werden, durch digitale Technologien und die Verbreitung des Internet stark verändert wurde. Eine Herausforderung, die sich dadurch ergibt, ist die Anwendung des Ursprungslandprinzips und die daraus resultierende Praxis des Geo-Blocking. Eine weitere Herausforderung besteht in Bezug auf die Frage der Weiterveräußerung digitaler Güter. Die einzelnen Stakeholder haben unterschiedliche Interessen bezüglich der Problemfelder. So zeigt sich beispielsweise, dass die Konsumenten (private oder institutionelle Nutzer) ein Interesse an der Weiterveräußerung digitaler Güter haben, die Anbieterseite (Autoren, Verwertungsgesellschaften, Verleger) dieses hingegen nicht hat. Der Parlamentsvorschlag zur Urheberrechtsreform entspricht eher den gewünschten politischen Maßnahmen der Anbieter als denen der Nachfrager. Bei zukünftigen Entscheidungen auf EU-Ebene sollte versucht werden, einen nachvollziehbaren Rechtsrahmen zu schaffen und somit Rechtssicherheit zu erzeugen. |
| JEL: | O34 O33 K00 |
| Date: | 2016 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:iwkpps:42016e&r=ipr |