Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Antitrust (4)
- Markets (3)
- Competition (2)
- Licenses (2)
- Monopolies (2)
-
- Patent law (2)
- Antitrust enforcement (1)
- Consumers (1)
- Copyright infringement (1)
- Copyright law (1)
- Copyright protection (1)
- Cost justification (1)
- Data Protection (1)
- Drugs (1)
- Equality (1)
- FTC v. Actavis Inc. (1)
- Generic drugs (1)
- Incentives (1)
- Informational Capitalism (1)
- Intellectual property (1)
- Law (1)
- Liability (1)
- Licensing agreements (1)
- Patent infringement (1)
- Patent injunctions (1)
- Patent settlements (1)
- Patents (1)
- Pharmaceuticals (1)
- Political Economy (1)
- Privacy (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law and Economics
Valuing Social Data, Amanda Parsons, Salome Viljoen
Valuing Social Data, Amanda Parsons, Salome Viljoen
Articles
Social data production—accumulating, processing, and using large volumes of data about people—is a unique form of value creation that characterizes the digital economy. Social data production also presents critical challenges for the legal regimes that encounter it. This Article provides scholars and policymakers with the tools to comprehend this new form of value creation through two descriptive contributions. First, it presents a theoretical account of social data, a mode of production that is cultivated and exploited for two distinct (albeit related) forms of value: prediction value and exchange value. Second, it creates and defends a taxonomy of three “scripts” that …
Antitrust And Wealth Inequality, Daniel Crane
Antitrust And Wealth Inequality, Daniel Crane
Articles
In recent years, progressive public intellectuals and prominent scholars have asserted that monopoly power lies at the root of wealth inequality and that increases in antitrust enforcement are necessary to stem its rising tide. This claim is misguided. Exercises of market power have complex, crosscutting effects that undermine the generality of the monopoly regressivity claim. Contrary to what the regressivity critics assume, wealthy shareholders and senior corporate executives do not capture the preponderance of monopoly rents. Such profits are broadly shared within and dissipated outside the firm. Further, many of the subjects of antitrust law are middle-class professionals, sole proprietors, …
Actavis, The Reverse Payment Fallacy, And The Continuing Need For Regulatory Solutions, Daniel A. Crane
Actavis, The Reverse Payment Fallacy, And The Continuing Need For Regulatory Solutions, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
The Actavis decision punted more than it decided. Although narrowing the range of possible outcomes by rejecting the legal rules at the extremes and opting for a rule of reason middle ground, the opinion failed to grapple with the most challenging issues of regulatory policy raised by pharmaceutical patent settlements. In particular, it failed to clearly delineate the social costs of permitting and disallowing patent settlements, avoided grappling with the crucial issues of patent validity and infringement, and erroneously focused on “reverse payments” as a distinctive antitrust problem when equally or more anticompetitive settlements can be crafted without reverse payments. …
Were Standard Oil's Railroad Rebates And Drawbacks Cost Justified?, Daniel A. Crane
Were Standard Oil's Railroad Rebates And Drawbacks Cost Justified?, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
In this essay, written for a symposium on the centennial anniversary of the Supreme Court's Standard Oil decision, I reexamine the costjustification question. In the first part, I explain why the cost-justification question is central to the entire case and its acquired and evolving historical meaning. In the second part, I review the evidence of claimed efficiencies passed on to the railroads. I conclude that there is evidence that Standard Oil passed along significant cost savings to the railroads and that these savings could have justified a portion of the rebates and drawbacks. However, I conclude that there is little …
Intellectual Liability, Daniel A. Crane
Intellectual Liability, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Intellectual property is increasingly a misnomer since the right to exclude is the defining characteristic of property and incentives to engage in inventive and creative activity are increasingly being granted in the form of liability rights (which allow the holder of the right to collect a royalty from users) rather than property rights (which allow the holder of the right to exclude others from using the invention or creation). Much of this recent reorientation in the direction of liability rules arises from a concern over holdout or monopoly power in intellectual property. The debate over whether liability rules or property …