International Protection of Intellectual Property (original) (raw)
Related papers
Globalization, intellectual property, and economic prosperity
Spanish Economic Review, 2006
Innovation and the adoption of new ideas is fundamental to economic progress, and so is free trade of goods and services. Here we examine the underlying economics of the market for ideas and its implications for trade. From a positive perspective, we examine how such markets function and how international trade interact with them. From a normative perspective, we examine the pitfalls of current intellectual property regulations, and how might they be improved. We highlight recent research by ourselves and others challenging the notion that government awards of monopoly through patents and copyright are "the way" to provide appropriate incentives for innovation.
IPRs and Innovation, Technology Transfer, and Economic Welfare
Advances in Finance, Accounting, and Economics
The TRIPS agreement states that Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) protection should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation, economic welfare, and to the transfer and dissemination of technology. However, there is still no consensus on whether IPRs protection has achieved its goal. Thus, the chapter provides a discussion on how the impact of IPRs on innovation, technology transfer, and economic welfare is affected by the difference in the income level of the countries. The results suggest that in high-income and upper middle-income countries, IPRs have a positive impact in these variables. Nevertheless, it seems that in lower middleincome and low-income countries, IPRs have not increased innovation, spurred transfer of technology. or created economic welfare.
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, and Development
Knowledge Generation and Protection, 2009
Knowledge embedded as a proportion of the total value of a product grows by the day in all sectors. Technological development is not only present in industrial goods but also in agricultural processes and in services. Capabilities for research, creation, and appropriation of knowledge and its transformation into new technologies form part of the foundations of wealth in the most developed nations and largely explain their economic growth. In this regard, analysis and debate on how to generate knowledge, technological innovation, and development is a topic of utmost importance for the developing countries. As of the entry into effect of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 1995, the architecture of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) has gradually become more complex. TRIPS has been promoted mainly by the most developed nations, and bilateral trade agreements have progressively incorporated diverse complementary rules, some of them known as TRIPS Plus for extending intellectual property beyond the original TRIPS. The mechanisms for intellectual property protection-patents, trademarks, geographical indications, copyright, breeder rights, etc.-present two important aspects: on the one hand, they are forms of appropriation of income that generate monopolistic or quasi-monopolistic gains for their holders and, on the other, they are financial incentives for research inasmuch as they remunerate the innovator for the investments carried out until succeeding in turn their innovations into market products. Both aspects are examined in this chapter.
2021
Access to global markets has lifted many out of poverty in emerging markets. 7 However, the benefits have not been equally shared. This article will concentrate on the intermingling of trade policy and IP laws from the perspective of the United States, which is considered to have one of the most robust bodies of IP law in the world. 8 This article will first provide an overview of the United States' approach in protecting it's IP interest against foreign partners and discuss current conflicts between the U.S. and its foreign counterparts. The article will then conduct an in-depth analysis of the IP related issues that are at the root of the current U.S.-China trade war, 9 the effect of said trade war on the U.S. economy, and question whether there might be a better way to address the preservation of the United States' IPR interests. Finally, this article will discuss areas where traditional IPR might be falling short in serving public interest and propose that an innovative approach to at least certain areas of Intellectual Property might be beneficial not only for the global economy but also to national interests.
Trade and intellectual property rights protection : by whom and for what?
In a North-South trade model with innovation and imitation, we investigate the effects of IPR protection and trade protection. Typically, we show that unlike Southern tari®, Northern tari® supplements IPR protection and is not a beggar-thy-neighbor policy. The optimal Northern tari® rate is higher than in conventional models without innovation. The global welfare rises as Northern tari® increases, but declines as Southern tari® increases. This calls for urgent trade liberalization in the South.
Strategic Model of Intellectual Property Protection Across Nations
Abstract In a two-country framework we study the strategic interacation between the gov- ernments regarding the choice of optimal patent policies and show that there always exist patent agreements that increase the welfare of each country. We then examine whether, in an optimal agreement, patent protection within each country will be dis- criminatory or uniform. On the assumption that countries are identical, we have shown that if cross-border imitation is perfect, the maximum welfare attainable under either regime is exactly equal. The positive marginal social gain from a uniformity clause arises only when imitation is imperfect. Keywords: Intellectual property rights; uniform protection; discriminatory protec- tion; research and development. JEL classifications: O31; O34; O38.
Endogenous innovation, outward-bound international patenting and national economic development
Social Science Research Network, 2021
In this paper the relationship between the pursuit of foreign patent rights by inventors or their assignees and economic development in the countries in which the respective inventors reside is examined. Outward-bound international patenting is contrasted with domestic patenting and with inward-bound international patenting. The empirical analysis establishes plausible evidence that outward-bound international patenting matters for economic development. The main conclusion, based on empirical research about the patenting profiles of 78 countries over 14 years, is that countries whose residents exhibit a relatively high proclivity for obtaining foreign patent protection for endogenous inventions are likely to enjoy relatively high levels of wealth per person. An implication of this conclusion is that the exploitation by national residents of foreign markets for the commercialization of endogenous technology through the sophisticated use of the intellectual property systems of foreign countries is an important factor for national economic development.
Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization
Handbook of Commercial Policy, 2016
This paper surveys the literature on international trade and the protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in the global economy. The discussion is organized around the major questions in the field. How does openness to trade affect national incentives for patent protection? What is the rationale for international coordination over patent policies? Given that countries are highly asymmetric with respect to their technological capabilities, what incentives do lagging countries have for enforcing IPRs and what are the consequences of requiring them to do so? To what extent do empirical studies support the major arguments for and against the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)? Finally, can the structure of TRIPS-both in terms of the core obligations it imposes on WTO members and the flexibilities that it provides them with respect to exhaustion policies and the use of compulsory licensing-be reconciled with existing models of IPR protection in the global economy? For helpful comments and discussions, I thank