A Question of Title: Property Rights and Asset Values

This paper examines the impact of land title systems on property values. The predominant system in the U.S., the recording system, awards title to claimants over current possessors, whereas the Torrens registration system awards title to the current owner. In theory, the registration system maximizes property value, all else equal, but in practice, the systems differ depending on the risk of a claim and administrative costs. A natural experiment in Cook County, Illinois, where both systems have existed since 1897, allows a test of the theory. The results, based on commercial and industrial properties, reveal that parcels tend to self-select into the two systems based on the predictions of the theory.

Essays on the Economics of Intellectual Property Rights

Väitöskirjassani tarkastelen informaatiohyödykkeiden ja tekijänoikeuksien taloustiedettä kahdesta eri perspektiivistä. Niistä ensimmäinen kuuluu endogeenisen kasvuteorian alaan. Väitöskirjassani yleistän ”pool of knowledge” -tyyppisen endogeenisen kasvumallin tilanteeseen, jossa patentoitavissa olevalla innovaatiolla on minimikoko, ja jossa uudenlaisen tuotteen patentoinut yritys voi menettää monopolinsa tuotteeseen jäljittelyn johdosta. Mallin kontekstissa voidaan analysoida jäljittelyn ja innovaatioilta vaaditun ”minimikoon” vaikutuksia hyvinvointiin ja talouskasvuun. Kasvun maksimoiva imitaation määrä on mallissa aina nolla, mutta hyvinvoinnin maksimoiva imitaation määrä voi olla positiivinen. Talouskasvun ja hyvinvoinnin maksimoivalla patentoitavissa olevan innovaation ”minimikoolla” voi olla mikä tahansa teoreettista maksimia pienempi arvo. Väitöskirjani kahdessa jälkimmäisessä pääluvussa tarkastelen informaatiohyödykkeiden kaupallista piratismia mikrotaloustieteellisen mallin avulla. Informaatiohyödykkeistä laittomasti tehtyjen kopioiden tuotantokustannukset ovat pienet, ja miltei olemattomat silloin kun niitä levitetään esimerkiksi Internetissä. Koska piraattikopioilla on monta eri tuottajaa, niiden hinnan voitaisiin mikrotaloustieteen teorian perusteella olettaa laskevan melkein nollaan, ja jos näin kävisi, kaupallinen piratismi olisi mahdotonta. Mallissani selitän kaupallisen piratismin olemassaolon olettamalla, että piratismista saatavan rangaistuksen uhka riippuu siitä, kuinka monille kuluttajille piraatti tarjoaa laittomia hyödykkeitä, ja että se siksi vaikuttaa piraattikopioiden markkinoihin mainonnan kustannuksen tavoin. Kaupallisten piraattien kiinteiden kustannusten lisääminen on mallissani aina tekijänoikeuksien haltijan etujen mukaista, mutta ”mainonnan kustannuksen” lisääminen ei välttämättä ole, vaan se saattaa myös alentaa laillisten kopioiden myynnistä saatavia voittoja. Tämä tulos poikkeaa vastaavista aiemmista tuloksista sikäli, että se pätee vaikka tarkasteltuihin informaatiohyödykkeisiin ei liittyisi verkkovaikutuksia. Aiemmin ei-kaupallisen piratismin malleista on usein johdettu tulos, jonka mukaan informaatiohyödykkeen laittomat kopiot voivat kasvattaa laillisten kopioiden myynnistä saatavia voittoja jos laillisten kopioiden arvo niiden käyttäjille riippuu siitä, kuinka monet muut kuluttajat käyttävät samanlaista hyödykettä ja jos piraattikopioiden saatavuus lisää riittävästi laillisten kopioiden arvoa. Väitöskirjan viimeisessä pääluvussa yleistän mallini verkkotoimialoille, ja tutkin yleistämäni mallin avulla sitä, missä tapauksissa vastaava tulos pätee myös kaupalliseen piratismiin.

Possession Taken by Theft and the Original Acquisition of Personal Property Rights

This paper queries the soundness of the view that wrongful possession (eg a thief’s possession of goods he has stolen) should be protected by the standard actions for interference with goods. It uses close historical analysis of the development of the relevant concepts through the cases to argue that this is not a proposition that is compelled on the authorities, nor one demanded as a matter of principle. It then abstracts to consider the implications of this argument at a theoretical level, exposing great need for development in the common law’s basic principles of possessory protection. It argues innovatively that the objects of the law might be better served by the creation of a more limited form of possessory protection, achieved through the possessor’s acquisition of a personal right, and correlatively that the values that underpin and justify our basic rules of possessory protection entail a more nuanced response to matters of property acquisition.

Between political control and efficiency gains: the evolution of agrarian property rights in Mexico

Includes bibliography

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!

The effects of intellectual property rights on knowledge spillovers and innovation: An empirical investigation

FDI is believed to be a conduit of new technologies between countries. The first chapter of this dissertation studies the advantages of outward FDI for the home country of multinationals conducting research and development abroad. We use patent citations as a proxy for technology spillovers and we bring empirical evidence that supports the hypothesis that a U.S. subsidiary conducting research and development overseas facilitates the flow of knowledge between its host and home countries.^ The second chapter examines the impact of intellectual property rights (IPR) reforms on the technology flows between the U.S. and host countries of U.S. affiliates. We again use patent citations to examine whether the diffusion of new technology between the host countries and the U.S. is accelerated by the reforms. Our results suggest that the reforms favor innovative efforts of domestic firms in the reforming countries rather than U.S. affiliates efforts. In other words, reforms mediate the technology flows from the U.S. to the reforming countries.^ The third chapter deals with another form of IPR, open source (OS) licenses. These differ in the conditions under which licensors and OS contributors are allowed to modify and redistribute the source code. We measure OS project quality by the speed with which programming bugs are fixed and test whether the license chosen by project leaders influences bug resolution rates. In initial regressions, we find a strong correlation between the hazard of bug resolution and the use of highly restrictive licenses. However, license choices are likely to be endogenous. We instrument license choice using (i) the human language in which contributors operate and (ii) the license choice of the project leaders for a previous project. We then find weak evidence that restrictive licenses adversely affect project success.^

Kwestia niekonstytucyjności roszczenia informacyjnego z art. 2861 p.w.p. – wybrane zagadnienia

Roszczenie informacyjne jest instrumentem prawnym, przy pomocy którego uprawniony z tytuł prawa do patentu, prawa ochronnego na wzór użytkowy, prawa z rejestracji wzoru przemysłowego czy też prawa ochronnego na znak towarowy może domagać się, aby sąd zobowiązał określony podmiot do ujawnienia informacji, które są niezbędne dla skutecznego dochodzenia roszczeń przed sądem. Niejednokrotnie bowiem ze względu na niematerialny charakter praw własności przemysłowej ustalenie naruszyciela tych praw oraz skali samego naruszenia jest znacznie utrudnione. Wokół tytułowego roszczenia informacyjnego na gruncie ustawy Prawo własności przemysłowej powstało szereg kontrowersji, którego zwieńczeniem było wniesienie skargi konstytucyjnej w 2015 roku, oczekującej obecnie na rozstrzygnięcie przez Trybunał Konstytucyjny. Realizacja roszczenia tego rodzaju powoduje bowiem, że ochrona praw podmiotu uprawnionego prowadzi nieuchronnie do ograniczenia praw innego podmiotu – zobowiązanego do udzielenia informacji. Wobec tego szczególnie istotne jest respektowanie zasady proporcjonalności przy ustanawianiu ograniczeń praw i wolności obywatelskich. W niniejszym opracowaniu została rozważona zasadność zarzutów niekonstytucyjności omawianej instytucji prawnej i jej zgodności m.in. z prawem do sądu oraz wolnością działalności gospodarczej w zestawieniu z zasadą proporcjonalności ograniczenia praw konstytucyjnych. Na tle wątpliwości co do zgodności z Konstytucją roszczenia informacyjnego przedstawione zostały także kwestie dotyczące wadliwości implementacji dyrektywy unijnej w zakresie roszczenia o udzielenie informacji. Wszystkie zagadnienia zostały omówione na tle stosunków gospodarczych, w jakich uczestniczą podmioty uprawnione do żądania udzielenia informacji, a także zobowiązane do ich udzielenia.

Intellectual property rights and sustainable development: a survey of major issues

Includes bibliography