Chapter 1: Introduction to Expropriation by Law
Full access

In recent years, the strengthening of intellectual property rights (IPRs) and their extension to new objects has been the subject of much criticism, which has highlighted the problems of the monopolization of certain markets; for example, patent-protected drugs or diagnostic tests carry soaring price tags. Our book offers a critical reflection on the attribution of IPRs between those who design products and those who attain them through their work. In the introduction, we present this problematic and how it fits into a body of research that has been examining the economic and social validity of these rights and their definition by legal professionals investing in the highly remunerative intellectual property market. The problematic and methodology are presented in detail. Although the focus is on patent rights, we show how our analysis applies to all IPRs, in particular to trademarks and copyright, the economic stakes of which have become increasingly important with the development of creative and cultural industries following an entrepreneurial logic.

  • Appadurai, A., 1986, Introduction: Commodities and politics of value. In A. Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, London and New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–63.

  • Baudry, J., 2014, Une histoire de la propriété intellectuelle. Les brevets d’invention en France, 1791–1844: acteurs, catégories, pratiques, PhD diss., EHESS.

  • Benassi, M. and D. Martin-Sanchez, 2022, Patent Intermediaries: New Actors in the Intellectual Property Market, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Bessy, C., 2006, Organisations intermédiaires et accords de licence de technologie, Revue d’Economie Industrielle, 115(3), 71–104.

  • Bessy, C., 2015b, L’organisation des activités des avocats, entre monopole et marché, Paris: Lextenso éditions, collection forum.

  • Bessy, C., 2022, Patent intermediaries: Between markets for technology and the IP market, Revue d’Économie Industrielle, 181(4), 103–24.

  • Bessy, C and E. Brousseau, 1998, Licensing of technology: Various contracts for diverse transactions, International Review of Law and Economics, 18, 451–89.

  • Bessy, C. and F. Chateauraynaud, 1995, Experts et faussaires, pour une sociologie de la perception, Paris: Métailié.

  • Bessy, C. and F. Chateauraynaud, 2019, The dynamics of authentication and counterfeits in markets, Historical Social Research, 44(1), 136–159.

  • Bessy, C. and P.-M. Chauvin, 2013, The power of market intermediaries: From information to valuation processes, Valuation Studies, 1(1), 83–117.

  • Bessy, C., Delpeuch T. and J. Pélisse (eds), 2011, Droit et régulations des activités économiques: Perspectives sociologiques et institutionnalistes, Paris: L.G.D.J. Lextenso éditions, collection Droit et Société.

  • Binctin, N., 2012, Droit de la propriété intellectuelle, Paris: Lextenso Editions.

  • Boldrin, M. and D. Levine, 2008, Against Intellectual Monopoly, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Boltanski, L. and A. Esquerre, 2020 (2017), Enrichment: A Critique of Commodities, Catherine Porter trans, Cambridge, Polity Press.

  • Boltanski, L. and L. Thévenot, 2006 (1991), On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • Brousseau, E. and C. Bessy, 2006, Public and private institutions in the governance of intellectual property rights, in B. Andersen (ed.), Intellectual Property Rights: Innovation, Governance and the Institutional Environment, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 243–77

  • Boyle, J., 2003, The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain, Law and Contemporary Problems, 66, 33–73.

  • Caillaud, B and A. Duchene, 2011, Patent office in innovation policy: Nobody is perfect, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 20, 242–52.

  • Cassier, M., 2007, Délimiter le marché de la santé et faire le droit du vivant: Le rôle des oppositions juridiques aux brevets sur les gènes en Europe, Revue d’Economie Industrielle, 120, 1–20.

  • Cassier, M., 2020, Instituer les vaccins contre la Covid-19 comme des biens communs mondiaux, L’enseignement supérieur et la recherche au temps du Coronavirus, https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03119260. Consulted October 26, 2021.

  • Chiapello, E., 2008, Artistes versus managers: Le management culturel face à la critique artiste, Paris: Métailié.

  • Coriat, B. (ed.), 2015, Le retour des communs, la crise de l’idéologie prioritaire, Paris: LLL.

  • Commons, J.R., 1924, Legal Foundations of Capitalism, New York: Macmillan.

  • David, P., 1998, Le compromis du système d’organisation de la production intellectuelle, Réseaux, 16 (88–89), 25–63.

  • Edelman, L., 2002, Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: Organizational mediation of civil rights law, American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1531–76.

  • Fligstein, N., 2001, Le mythe du marché, Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 139, 3–12.

  • Galvez-Behar, G., 2008, La République des inventeurs: Propriété et organisation de l’innovation en France (1791–1922), Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.

  • Guellec, D., Madiès T. and J.-C. Prager, 2010, Le marché des brevets dans l’économie de la connaissance. Rapport pour le Conseil d’analyse économique.

  • Hall, B., 2007, Patents and patent policy, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23, 568–87.

  • Hall, P. and D. Soskice, 2001, Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Hermitte, M.-A., 1985, Le rôle des concepts mous dans les techniques de déjuridicisation’, in L’exemple des droits intellectuels, Paris: Dalloz.

  • Hermitte M.-A. and P.-B. Joly, 1992, Biotechnologies et brevets: Un essai d’analyse économique, in B. Collombel and G. Joignaux (eds), Innovation, changement technique et agro-alimentaire, Versailles: INRA.

  • Hess, C. and E. Ostrom (eds), 2007, Understanding Knowledge as Commons, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Jaffe A.B. and J. Lerner, 2004, Innovation and its Discontents: How our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to do About It, Princeton, MA: Princeton University Press.

  • Lamoreaux, N. and K. Sokoloff, 2002, Intermediaries in the US market for technology: 1870–1920, NBER, Working Paper 9017.

  • Lazega, E., 2016, Réseaux et régulation: Pour un institutionnalisme néo-structural, Revue de la régulation, 19, Spring.

  • Levin R., Klevoric A., Nelson R. and S. Winter, 1987, Appropriating the returns from industrial R&D, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, 783–831.

  • Macmillan, F., 2006, Public interest and the public domain in an era of corporate dominance, in B. Andersen (ed.), Intellectual Property Rights: Innovation, Governance and the Institutional Environment, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 46–69.

  • Merges, R., 2011, Justifying Intellectual Property, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Orléan, A., 2014 (2011), The Empire of Value: A New Foundation for Economics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Pistor, K., 2019, The Code of Capital: How Law Creates Wealth and Inequality, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • Roubier, P., 1952, Le droit de la propriété industrielle, Paris: Sirey.

  • Scotchmer, S., 1991, Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 29–41.