The abuse of intellectual property rights and regulations in China: a law and economic analysis

From the institutional point of view, the legal system of IPR (intellectual property right, hereafter, IPR) is one of incentive institutions of innovation and it plays very important role in the development of economy. According to the law, the owner of the IPR enjoy a kind of exclusive right to use his IP(intellectual property, hereafter, IP), in other words, he enjoys a kind of legal monopoly position in the market. How to well protect the IPR and at the same time to regulate the abuse of IPR is very interested topic in this knowledge-orientated market and it is the basic research question in this dissertation. In this paper, by way of comparing study and by way of law and economic analyses, and based on the Austrian Economics School’s theories, the writer claims that there is no any contradiction between the IPR and competition law. However, in this new economy (high-technology industries), there is really probability of the owner of IPR to abuse his dominant position. And with the characteristics of the new economy, such as, the high rates of innovation, “instant scalability”, network externality and lock-in effects, the IPR “will vest the dominant undertakings with the power not just to monopolize the market but to shift such power from one market to another, to create strong barriers to enter and, in so doing, granting the perpetuation of such dominance for quite a long time.”1 Therefore, in order to keep the order of market, to vitalize the competition and innovation, and to benefit the customer, in EU and US, it is common ways to apply the competition law to regulate the IPR abuse. In Austrian Economic School perspective, especially the Schumpeterian theories, the innovation/competition/monopoly and entrepreneurship are inter-correlated, therefore, we should apply the dynamic antitrust model based on the AES theories to analysis the relationship between the IPR and competition law. China is still a developing country with relative not so high ability of innovation. Therefore, at present, to protect the IPR and to make good use of the incentive mechanism of IPR legal system is the first important task for Chinese government to do. However, according to the investigation reports,2 based on their IPR advantage and capital advantage, some multinational companies really obtained the dominant or monopoly market position in some aspects of some industries, and there are some IPR abuses conducted by such multinational companies. And then, the Chinese government should be paying close attention to regulate any IPR abuse. However, how to effectively regulate the IPR abuse by way of competition law in Chinese situation, from the law and economic theories’ perspective, from the legislation perspective, and from the judicial practice perspective, there is a long way for China to go!

Analysis of Copy Number Variants identifies new candidate genes for Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and Intellectual Disability (ID) are complex neuropsychiatric disorders characterized by extensive clinical and genetic heterogeneity and with overlapping risk factors. The aim of my project was to further investigate the role of Copy Numbers Variants (CNVs), identified through genome-wide studies performed by the Autism Geome Project (AGP) and the CHERISH consortium in large cohorts of ASD and ID cases, respectively. Specifically, I focused on four rare genic CNVs, selected on the basis of their impact on interesting ASD/ID candidate genes: a) a compound heterozygous deletion involving CTNNA3, predicted to cause the lack of functional protein; b) a 15q13.3 duplication containing CHRNA7; c) a 2q31.1 microdeletion encompassing KLHL23, SSB and METTL5; d) Lastly, I investigated the putative imprinting regulation of the CADPS2 gene, disrupted by a maternal deletion in two siblings with ASD and ID. This study provides further evidence for the role of CTNNA3, CHRNA7, KLHL23 and CADPS2 as ASD and/or ID susceptibility genes, and highlights that rare genetic variation contributes to disease risk in different ways: some rare mutations, such as those impacting CTNNA3, act in a recessive mode of inheritance, while other CNVs, such as those occurring in the 15q13.3 region, are implicated in multiple developmental and/or neurological disorders possibly interacting with other susceptibility variants elsewhere in the genome. On the other hand, the discovery of a tissue-specific monoallelic expression for the CADPS2 gene, implicates the involvement of epigenetic regulatory mechanisms as risk factors conferring susceptibility to ASD/ID.