Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
63,552
result(s) for
"INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS"
Sort by:
Human rights and intellectual property : mapping the global interface
\"This book explores the interface between intellectual property and human rights law and policy. The relationship between these two fields has captured the attention of governments, policymakers, and activist communities in a diverse array of international and domestic political and judicial venues. These actors often raise human rights arguments as counterweights to the expansion of intellectual property in areas including freedom of expression, public health, education, privacy, agriculture, and the rights of indigenous peoples. At the same time, creators and owners of intellectual property are asserting a human rights justification for the expansion of legal protections. This book explores the legal, institutional, and political implications of these competing claims: by offering a framework for exploring the connections and divergences between these subjects; by identifying the pathways along which jurisprudence, policy, and political discourse are likely to evolve; and by serving as an educational resource for scholars, activists, and students\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
An institution-based view of global IPR history
Leveraging the use of history to advance international business research, this article focuses on the crucial debate over intellectual property rights (IPR) between the United States and China. Ironically, during the 19th century the United States was not a leading IPR advocate as it is today, but was a leading IPR violator. Developing an institution-based view of IPR history, we identify three underlying theoretical mechanisms that help to explain IPR in the two countries - path dependence, long-term processes, and institutional transitions. We argue that both the US refusal to protect foreign IPR in the 19th century and the current Chinese lack of enthusiasm to meet US IPR demands embody rational responses to their respective situations. However, given long-term processes with intensifying ¡somorphic pressures, institutional transitions in favor of better IPR protection are quite possible. Finally, going above and beyond these two countries, we draw on the IPR history in over ten other countries to develop a more globally generalizable framework, which in turn contributes to the key question of how history matters.
Journal Article
Protecting intellectual property in foreign subsidiaries: An internal network defense perspective
This study examines firm internal network structures as a defense of intellectual property rights (IPR) in high-risk environments with inadequate IPR protection. Specifically, we investigate firm social and knowledge-based network structures individually. A foreign subsidiary can intensify social complexity by strengthening the small-worldness in its collaboration networks and attenuate knowledge-relatedness by decreasing the small-worldness in its knowledge networks. In a subsidiary, the effectiveness of these measures depends to some extent on the parent firm’s experience in the host country. Longitudinal data on 401 foreign subsidiaries in the pharmaceutical industry from 1980 to 2017 have been analyzed in a quasi-experiment using difference-in-differences and two-stage regression. The results provide empirical support for these ideas. Findings highlight the explanatory power of internal network structures when discussing knowledge protection and show the utility of taking an internal network defense perspective in examining IPR protection.
Journal Article
Multinationals, innovation, and institutional context: IPR protection and distance effects
We characterize the knowledge production process whereby the inventive capabilities of the firm generate innovation output in highly inventive multinational enterprises (MNEs). We explore the sensitivity of this relationship to the strength of intellectual property rights (IPR) protection across the MNEs R&D subsidiaries. We argue that MNE innovative performance will be enhanced when the firm’s R&D activities are based in locations where IPR protection is stronger. Moreover, when considering the internal geography of the MNEs R&D activities, innovation performance depends on the distance between the home- and host-country IPR regime. Thus, innovation performance is worse, as the difference between home and host IPR regimes increases. Finally, we explore asymmetries in this relationship, in particular that the deterioration is more marked when MNEs locate their R&D activities in host economies with IPR protection significantly less strict than in their home country. We test these ideas using a unique new dataset about the most innovative MNEs in the world, an unbalanced panel of around 900 MNEs observed for the period 2004 to 2013 and find strong support for all our hypotheses.
Journal Article
The Implementation Game
In the 1990s, the fight between North and South over intellectual property (IP) reached new heights. The result was the World Trade Organization's (WTO's) deeply contested agreement on Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Widely resented by developing countries, TRIPS nonetheless permits them some hard‐won flexibility. Puzzling, however, is why some developing countries have used that flexibility and others have not. Even more curious is that despite securing some extra concessions, many of the poorest countries have made least use of them. For scholars of international political economy and law, this book is the first detailed exploration of the links between global IP politics and the implementation of IP reforms. It exposes how power politics occur not just within global trade talks but afterwards when countries implement agreements. For developing countries, TRIPS did not end the IP offensive. At the urging of lobbyists from large multinational companies, powerful countries backtracked on the flexibilities in TRIPS and pursued even stronger global IP rules. To prevent precedents for weaker IP standards in poorer countries, they issued threats to market access, aid, investment, and political alliances. Further, they used new trade deals and, more subtly, ‘capacity‐building’ (assisted by the World Intellectual Property Organization, among others) to leverage faster compliance and higher standards than TRIPS requires. Meanwhile, ‘pro‐development’ advocates from civil society, other UN agencies, and developing countries worked to counter ‘compliance‐plus’ pressures and defend the use of TRIPS flexibilities, sometimes with success. Within developing countries, most governments had little experience of IP law. They often deferred TRIPS implementation to IP offices cut‐off from trade politics and national policymaking, making them more vulnerable to the TRIPS‐plus agenda. In francophone Africa, regional IP arrangements magnified this effect.
eBook
Rethinking firm-specific advantages from intellectual property rights: Boundary conditions for MNEs
We develop three sets of theoretical boundary conditions for the firm-specific advantages (FSA) and country-specific advantages (CSA) view of intellectual property rights (IPR) in international business. These conditions explain when and where MNEs’ FSAs accrued from IPR assets (IPR-FSAs) are larger or smaller. In terms of IPR assets’ structure, we explicate the conditions creating complementarity problems among MNEs’ IPR that make IPR-FSAs larger, and the conditions under which complementarity problems between MNEs’ IPR and closely related legal rights make IPR-FSAs smaller. In terms of IPR assets’ geographic deployability, we explicate the rare conditions under which certain IPR-FSAs are non-location bound. However, we also explain that most IPR-FSAs are quasi-location-bound, and sometimes can even be fully location-bound, and therefore are smaller for MNEs’ units abroad. In terms of IPR assets’ defensibility, we explicate the conditions allowing IPR to still afford FSAs to MNEs even if the IPR cannot be favorably enforced. We argue that integrating these conditions into the FSA–CSA framework enables it to more precisely explain when and where there are heterogeneities in the size of MNEs’ IPR-FSAs. We also explain how our work can facilitate the empirical study of IPR-FSAs in international business research and guide MNEs’ IPR strategies.
Journal Article