|
on Law and Economics |
| By: | Ibáñez Colomo, Pablo |
| Abstract: | Remedies are central in contemporary EU antitrust enforcement. However, they remain relatively misunderstood. Against this background, this article has three main objectives. It seeks, first, to shed light on the nature and purpose of remedial action under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, with a focus on the European Commission’s activity. The point of intervention, the case law shows, is to bring an infringement effectively to an end. As a matter of positive law, it is unclear that there is room for restorative remedies (that is, remedies that seek to recreate the conditions of competition as they would have existed in the absence of the practice). Second, the article takes a critical perspective on the practice of the past decade. It appears, in particular, that a ‘principles-based approach’ to the administration of remedies is likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes. Finally, some recommendations are outlined so that the letter of the law matches the demands and ambitions of the sort of regulatory-like intervention that is necessary in digital markets and other industries presenting similar features. |
| JEL: | K21 K23 L40 L41 L43 L51 |
| Date: | 2025–01–13 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:126537 |
| By: | Payal Malik (Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER)); Aman Sinha; Harishankar Jagadeesh |
| Abstract: | This policy brief examines the evolution of Indian jurisprudence with regard to the licensing and enforcement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs). This analysis gains relevance in the context of India's technological ambitions, particularly in mobile phone manufacturing and Internet of Things (IoT). SEPs protect technologies that are part of technical standards which facilitate seamless connectivity across devices and platforms. SEPs are critical to India's smartphone and IoT markets. This brief identifies key legal and economic challenges around SEP licensing, including the balance of power between patent holders and implementers. A review of Indian jurisprudence reveals that courts consistently uphold the rights of SEP holders, while emphasizing the importance of good-faith negotiations and constructive engagement by implementers in licensing discussions. Our preliminary findings suggest that, while the Indian judiciary is becoming increasingly adept at navigating SEP disputes, some guidelines or a special mechanism for startups to enforce their IPR may be required to encourage smaller innovators to participate in the intellectual property ecosystem. This brief aims to inform policymakers, technocrats, and legal professionals about the critical intersections of law, economics, and technology involved in shaping India's SEP licensing and enforcement framework. |
| Keywords: | Intellectual Property Rights, Technology Standards, Cellular Standards, Standard Essential Patents, FRAND Licensing, Indian Patent Law, Indian IPR Jurisprudence, Innovation Ecosystem, icrier |
| Date: | 2024–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bdc:ppaper:30 |
| By: | Ms. Lydia E Sofrona; Mr. Christophe J Waerzeggers; Brendan Crowley |
| Abstract: | Well-functioning tax systems anchor their governance arrangements in law. This paper develops an analytical framework from which the core legal principles for sound tax governance can be derived to inform the design of countries’ legal frameworks for administration and tax procedure. It then applies this analytical framework to derive key legal features that should be embedded in laws for tax administration—including additional considerations for semi-autonomous revenue authorities— and tax procedure, to ensure a balance between tax administration powers and adequate taxpayer protections. |
| Keywords: | Tax governance; tax law; tax administration; tax procedure; legal design; A. tax Governance; governance arrangement; design consideration; taxpayer relationship; Tax administration core functions; Taxpayer charter; Semi-autonomous revenue bodies |
| Date: | 2025–01–17 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:imf:imfwpa:2025/017 |
| By: | Xiao, Leon Y. (IT University of Copenhagen); Lund, Mie |
| Abstract: | Loot boxes in video games can be purchased with real-world money in exchange for random rewards. Stakeholders are concerned about loot boxes’ similarities with gambling and their potential harms (e.g., overspending money and developing gambling problems). The previous Conservative UK Government decided to first try relying on industry self-regulation to address the issue, rather than to impose legislation. These self-regulations have since been published by the industry trade body, Ukie (UK Interactive Entertainment). Responding to many stakeholders’ desire for a transparent and independent assessment of their implementation, we assessed companies’ compliance with three empirically testable measures and also whether the rules were actively enforced. The 100 highest-grossing iPhone games were longitudinally examined both prior to the self-regulations coming into effect on 18 July 2024 (i.e., between January and June 2024) and after to check for potential improvement (i.e., between July and December 2024). Disappointingly, widespread non-compliance and non-enforcement were observed. Amongst games with loot boxes, none (0.0%) sought to obtain explicit parental consent prior to enabling loot box purchasing by under-18s. Only 23.5% disclosed loot box presence, and the few disclosures were all visually obscured and difficult to access. A mere 8.6% consistently disclosed the probabilities of obtaining different rewards for all loot boxes found. The rules were not enforced, contrary to Ukie’s promise: all of the games that were non-compliant before the self-regulations came into effect remained non-compliant many months later, despite Ukie and the Apple App Store having been provided with evidence of the contraventions and put on notice to delist those games if remedial actions were not forthcoming. Platforms (e.g., app stores), the advertising regulator, and the consumer protection regulators must better enforce pre-existing rules to ensure adequate consumer protection as already promised. Video games and loot boxes are no longer novel; laws that apply to all industries must also be enforced against this one. Governments are advised against relying on industry self-regulation, especially after repeated demonstrations of its many failings. Stricter legal regulation of loot boxes should be adopted. Preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3KNYB (date of in-principle acceptance: 25 March 2024). |
| Date: | 2025–01–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:xmwgy |
| By: | Florian Schuett; Chayanin Mipusanawan |
| Abstract: | There is widespread concern about the lack of transparency regard ing standard essential patents (SEPs). This paper examines the pro posal to introduce essentiality checks, a certification scheme for de clared SEPs. We develop a framework that allows us to evaluate how essentiality checks would impact licensing, litigation, and incentives to innovate. In our model, an upstream innovator invests in R&D and privately learns about the likely essentiality of its patents for a standard. The innovator then licenses the patents to a downstream implementer who can contest the essentiality of the patent in court. We identify a tradeoff whereby essentiality checks can reduce litiga tion but also provide excessive incentives for R&D investment. Their overall welfare effect depends on the level of the “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) royalty rate. |
| Date: | 2023–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ete:ceswps:746861 |
| By: | Nuria Rodriguez-Planas (Queens College – CUNY & IZA, University of Barcelona & IEB); Alan Secor (CUNY Research Foundation & Illinois Institute of Technology) |
| Abstract: | Have the recent changes in reproductive rights changed women’s perceptions of discrimination and fair treatment relative to men’s perceptions? To address this question, we collected online survey data (N=1, 374) during spring 2023 using a randomized design that provided information about the enactment of State antiabortion laws and the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court to a treatment group but no information to an untreated control group. This exogenous variation in information dissemination was used to analyze perceived fairness and discrimination of treated individuals, by sex. We find that treatment increases women’s overall perception of discrimination and unfair treatment in the US by 11.5 percent of a standard deviation and their perception relative to men by 21.8 percent of a standard deviation, widening an already existing gender gap. These results support the notion that the recent state and federal abortion restrictions can impact individuals’ perceptions of fairness and discrimination in the U.S. and do so differentially by gender. |
| Keywords: | State and federal abortion restrictions, gender, perceived discrimination and fairness, rights protection, randomized information treatment. |
| JEL: | J15 J16 I K36 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ieb:wpaper:doc2024-13 |