Intellectual Property and Antitrust

Intellectual Property and Antitrust

A Comparative Economic Analysis of US and EU Law

New Horizons in Competition Law and Economics series

Mariateresa Maggiolino

This insightful book compares how the US and EU antitrust authorities have enforced Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and Article 102 of the TFEU against monopolists' practices involving intellectual property rights.

Chapter 3: Ownership of IPRs

Mariateresa Maggiolino

Subjects: economics and finance, intellectual property, law - academic, european law, intellectual property law


CONCERNS ABOUT ALLOWING MONOPOLISTS TO HOLD IPRS IP laws are very ‘democratic’: they allow any kind of firm, dominant firms included, to hold IPRs. After all, IP laws deal with ownership of resources and not with the likely consequences that monopoly power – however strengthened by IPRs – may produce in markets. Further, whatever the rationale supporting IPRs,1 policy-makers do not contradict any of them by allowing monopolists to hold IPRs. For instance, there is no apparent reason why monopolists should be prevented from owning the fruits of their labor that result in inventions and creative works; likewise there is no apparent reason why society as a whole would welcome the benefits that monopolists’ innovations produce less than the advantages that any other firm’s intellectual goods produce. Nevertheless, once outside the IP perspective, one might question whether, under at least some economic models, letting dominant firms own IPRs might both strengthen their market power and harm consumer welfare. Consequently, one could ask if US courts and EU antitrust institutions have ever forbidden or restricted dominant firms from developing and acquiring IPRs2 – for example, by adopting different standards for In this regard, see the book’s introduction. For simplicity’s sake, this chapter avoids making any distinction between the act of innovating – that is, developing and acquiring either an invention or a creative work – and the acts of patenting and copyrighting them – that is, the act of procuring an IPR upon those innovations. Further, it must be acknowledged that some of the anticompetitive strategies...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information