Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Antitrust And Intellectual Property: A Brief Introduction, Keith N. Hylton
Antitrust And Intellectual Property: A Brief Introduction, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
Intellectual property law and antitrust have been described as conflicting bodies of law, and the reason is easy to see. Antitrust law aims to protect consumers from the consequences of monopolization. Intellectual property law seeks to enhance incentives to innovate by granting monopolies in ideas or expressions of ideas. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the purported conflict between antitrust and intellectual property. The chapter is largely descriptive, and focuses on current or developing litigation rather than historical controversies. Many of the modern examples of conflict can be attributed to problems of classification.
Markovits On Defining Monopolization: A Comment, Keith N. Hylton
Markovits On Defining Monopolization: A Comment, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
In this comment I focus on Richard Markovits’s definition of monopolization in his new book, Economics and the Interpretation and Application of U.S. and E.U. Antitrust Law (Springer 2014), and also his assertion that monopolization is distributively unjust. I agree wholeheartedly with his approach to defining monopolization, though I might alter a few details. However, I think the distributive justice effects of monopolization are ambiguous.
Roger Blair And Intellectual Property, Keith N. Hylton
Roger Blair And Intellectual Property, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
Although intellectual property is just a sidelight of Roger Blair's work, he has published at least seven articles and coauthored a book on this subject. Blair's work sets out robust economic models that address nearly all of the significant economic issues in intellectual property. Moreover, by using the property rules framework, he has offered a useful counterweight to the reward-to-loss theory that dominates the literature.
Innovation And Optimal Punishment, With Antitrust Applications, Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin
Innovation And Optimal Punishment, With Antitrust Applications, Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin
Faculty Scholarship
This article modifies the optimal punishment analysis by incorporating investment incentives with external benefits. In the models examined, the recommendation that the optimal penalty should internalize the marginal social harm is no longer valid. We focus on antitrust applications. In light of the benefits from innovation, the optimal policy will punish monopolizing firms more leniently than suggested in the standard static model. It may be optimal not to punish the monopolizing firm at all, or to reward the firm rather than punish it. We examine the precise balance between penalty and reward in the optimal punishment scheme.
American And European Monopolization Law: A Doctrinal And Empirical Comparison, Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin
American And European Monopolization Law: A Doctrinal And Empirical Comparison, Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin
Faculty Scholarship
This paper focuses on the differences between Article 82 and Section 2, reflecting largely on the American experience. We start with a discussion of the American experience and use that as a background from which to examine the European law on monopolies. American law is more conservative (less interventionist), reflecting the error cost analysis that is increasingly common in American courts. The second half of this paper provides an empirical comparison of the American and European regimes. Although a preliminary empirical examination suggests that the scope of a country’s monopolization law is inversely related to its degree of trade dependence, …
The Law And Economics Of Monopolization Standards, Keith N. Hylton
The Law And Economics Of Monopolization Standards, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
Monopolization, the restriction of competition by a dominant firm, is regulated in roughly half of the world’s nations. The two most famous laws regulating monopolization are Section 2 of the Sherman Act, in the United States, and Article 82 of the European Community Treaty. Both laws have been understood as prohibiting ‘abuses’ of monopoly power.
Unilateral Refusals To Deal And The Antitrust Modernization Commission Report, Keith N. Hylton
Unilateral Refusals To Deal And The Antitrust Modernization Commission Report, Keith N. Hylton
Faculty Scholarship
The Antitrust Modernization Commission recommends that refusals to deal with rivals in the same market should rarely, if ever, be unlawful. I will focus on the principles that should determine the legal standard governing unilateral refusals to deal. A legal test that is strongly biased in favor of defendants, as the Commission recommends, is desirable as a default rule and especially in cases in which the essential facility at the core of the refusal to deal dispute is efficiency enhancing. However, there is another set of cases in which the defendant gains control of an essential market portal. In these …