Economic analysis rarely appears on the judicial horizon in intellectual property litigation. In competition cases, by contrast, economists are familiar figures in the courtroom and the language of economics is scattered throughout the judgments of even the highest courts. One might expect, therefore, that refusals to license intellectual property would generate the same fruitful symbiosis between law and economics when those refusals surface in competition proceedings. This however, has not been how the law on this subject has developed in most jurisdictions. Courts and enforcement agencies faced with a unilateral refusal to license have instead tended to retreat into sketchily articulated black letter rules and presumptions which then have to be fenced off from the rest of competition law by economically irrelevant qualifications and distinctions based on private law categorisations of, and rationales for, individual intellectual property rights. This bypassing of case-by-case analysis in favour of more traditional modes of legal reasoning is not entirely the fault of lawyers. Economists have contributed to this state of affairs by urging judges and regulators to convert empirically undernourished theories about the proper role of intellectual property in a market economy into rules of law and evidentiary presumptions intended to be binding in future cases. How this came about and what it means for the future of effective competition enforcement globally are the twin concerns of this book.

Striking a proper balance between unilateral exercise of intellectual property rights on the one hand and competition rules on the other hand is not an easy exercise. The right owners’ unilateral behaviour of refusal to license is one such delicate issue, particularly for China, considering that it has not been clarif ied within existing competition rules how to assess a right owner’s specif ic unilateral practices. In a series of cases, the EU courts have established the exceptional circumstances in which the right owners’ refusal conduct might be considered as an infringement of EU competition rules. In general, Chinese competition law has been modelled after the EU competition rules. This book firstly examines the EU approaches on dominant undertakings’ refusal to license intellectual property rights and the follow-on pricing issue, and then explores to what extent the EU model could contribute to China’s anti-monopoly practice.

Distinguished economists, political scientists, and legal experts discuss the implications of the increasingly globalized protection of intellectual property rights for the ability of countries to provide their citizens with such important public goods as basic research, education, public health, and environmental protection. Such items increasingly depend on the exercise of private rights over technical inputs and information goods, which could usher in a brave new world of accelerating technological innovation. However, higher and more harmonized levels of international intellectual property rights could also throw up high roadblocks in the path of follow-on innovation, competition and the attainment of social objectives. It is at best unclear who represents the public interest in negotiating forums dominated by powerful knowledge cartels. This is the first book to assess the public processes and inputs that an emerging transnational system of innovation will need to promote technical progress, economic growth and welfare for all participants.

In Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property Rights: Cases and Materials, Christopher R. Leslie describes how patents, copyrights, and trademarks confer exclusionary rights on their owners, and how firms sometimes exercise this exclusionary power in ways that exceed the legitimate bounds of their intellectual property rights. Leslie explains that while substantive intellectual property law defines the scope of the exclusionary rights, antitrust law often provides the most important consequences when owners of intellectual property misuse their rights in a way that harms consumers or illegitimately excludes competitors. Antitrust law defines the limits of what intellectual property owners can do with their IP rights. In this book, Leslie explores what conduct firms can and cannot engage in while acquiring and exploiting their intellectual property rights, and surveys those aspects of antitrust law that are necessary for both antitrust practitioners and intellectual property attorneys to understand. This book is ideal for an advanced antitrust course in a JD program. In addition to building on basic antitrust concepts, it fills in a gap that is often missing in basic antitrust courses yet critical for an intellectual property lawyer: the intersection of intellectual property and antitrust law. The relationship between intellectual property and antitrust is particularly valuable as an increasing number of law schools offer specializations and LLMs in intellectual property. This book also provides meaningful material for both undergraduate and graduate business schools programs because it explains how antitrust law limits the marshalling of intellectual property rights.

Examining the general principles of liability and focusing on the concept of duty, this book provides reference for practitioners and academics. It considers key developments in legislation, including the Human Rights Act. It contains an analysis of case law with footnotes, and also considers legislative developments and their implications

In modern markets innovation is at least as great a concern as price competition. The book discusses how antitrust policy and patent and copyright laws interact to create market dynamics that affect both competition and innovation. Antitrust and intellectual property policies for the most part are complementary, sharing common goals of promoting innovation and economic welfare. In some cases, however, their distinct approaches, one based on competition and the other on exclusion, come into conflict. As antitrust authorities focus increasingly on ensuring that firms do not interfere with innovation by rivals or impede the pace of technological progress in an industry, they necessarily must confront difficult questions about the strength and scope of intellectual property rights. When should private property rights give way to public competition objectives? When is it appropriate to remedy anticompetitive outcomes through access to protected intellectual property? How does antitrust enforcement or competition itself affect incentives to innovate? Leading economists and lawyers address these questions from both US and EU perspectives in discussing salient antitrust cases involving intellectual property rights such as Microsoft, Magill, Kodak, IMS and Intel.