Intellectual property and competition: unity and struggle of opposites

Occupation: Senior researcher of the Information Law and international information security sector of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences; associate Professor of St. Petersburg state University; Partner of Dentons Law Firm
Affiliation:
Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences
St. Petersburg state University
Dentons Law Firm
Address: Russian Federation, St. Petersburg

Journal name

Gosudarstvo i pravo

Edition

Issue 2

Pages

83-94

Abstract

The article deals with issues related to intersection between intellectual property rights and antimonopoly regulation in Russia and in foreign countries. The authors analyze the approaches taken in the European Union and various countries, including USA, China, Japan, Indonesia, Mexico, and some other countries. Based on the analysis, it is proved that according to global trends, intellectual property law and antitrust law share the common objectives, namely promotion of innovations and enhancing consumers’ welfare. At the same time each has its own set of special tools and methods used to achieve the established goals. Situations in which the conduct of the right holder may pose a threat from a competition law perspective should be assessed on a case-by-case basis with respect to all applicable circumstances. Most of the States lean towards adopting flexible means of regulation – various guidelines. The choice of a particular model of legal regulation in Russia should be made with due consideration of the current economic situation, strategic interests and international obligations of the Russian Federation

Keywords

intellectual property, exclusive rights, antimonopoly law, competition, legal monopoly, antimonopoly immunities, promotion of innovations, digital economy

Received

18.11.2020

Publication date

17.02.2021

Number of characters

51679

Cite

GOST	Lyalkova S., Naumov V. Intellectual property and competition: unity and struggle of opposites // Gosudarstvo i pravo – 2021. – Issue 2 C. 83-94 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://gospravo-journal.ru/S102694520013675-3-1 (circulation date: 19.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S102694520013675-3
MLA	Lyalkova, Svetlana, Naumov, Viktor B "Intellectual property and competition: unity and struggle of opposites." Gosudarstvo i pravo 2 (2021):83-94. DOI: 10.31857/S102694520013675-3
APA	Lyalkova S., Naumov V. (2021). Intellectual property and competition: unity and struggle of opposites. Gosudarstvo i pravo (2), pp.83-94 DOI: 10.31857/S102694520013675-3

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 759

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Antitrust regulation in the digital age. How to protect competition in the context of globalization and the fourth industrial revolution / scientific ed. by A. Yu. Tsarikovsky, A. Yu. Ivanov, E.A. Voynikanis. M., 2019. P. 38 (in Russ.).

2. Voynikanis E.A. Intellectual property in the digital age: a paradigm of balance and flexibility. M., 2013 (in Russ.).

3. Borozhevich A.S. Antitrust immunity for intellectual property in Russia when building a digital economy: cancel or keep? // Journal of the Intellectual Property Rights Court. 2018. No. 19. P. 55–70 (in Russ.).

4. Vorozhevich A.S. Exclusive rights in the digital sphere: objects, borders, limits of implementation (commentary on legislation) // Modern information technologies and law / ex. ed. E.B. Lauts. M., 2019. P. 208 - 233 (in Russ.).

5. Gurevich V.A. Legislative support for maintaining competition and limiting monopolism abroad // Herald of Economics, Law and Sociology. 2007. No. 3. P. 45 (in Russ.).

6. Kashevarov A. In some countries, even today, there are antitrust immunities intellectual property that restrict competition? URL: https://fas.gov.ru/news/27596 (accessed: 19.10.2020) (in Russ.).

7. Kurdin A.A., Shastitko A.E. Two arguments for limiting antitrust in the implementation of intellectual property rights in developing economies // Issues of state and municipal administration. 2017. No. 1. P. 31–49 (in Russ.).

8. Pavlova E., Kalyatin V., Suspitsyna M. Civil Law and antimonopoly regulation of exclusive rights: a tool to choose from? // Competition and law. 2013. No. 4 (in Russ.).

9. Coston W.D. The Patent-Antitrust Interface: Are There Any No-No’s Today? URL: https://www.venable.com/files/Publication/fc1499d2-4dc6-441d-b24d-21a93f06769d/Preview/PublicationAttachment/7896b76f-4d3e-44be-9089-24d70be3cea2/Coston--The-Patent-Antitrust-Interface.pdf (accessed: 03.08.2020).

10. Ginsburg D.H. and Geradin D. and Klovers K. Antitrust and Intellectual Property in the United States and the European Union (August 23, 2018).

11. Hemphill C.S. Intellectual Property and Competition Law (May 9, 2017). Forthcoming, Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law (Rochelle C. Dreyfuss & Justine Pila eds. 2017), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2965617 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2965617 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

12. Hou Liyang. Antitrust Regulation of Intellectual Property Rights in China (August 20, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2648736 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2648736 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

13. Hovenkamp H.J. "Antitrust and the Patent System A Reexamination" (2015). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1820. URL: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1820 (accessed: 03.08.2020).

14. Hovenkamp H.J. "Innovation and the Domain of Competition Policy" (2008). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1772. URL: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1772 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

15. Lemley M.A. A New Balance between IP and Antitrust (April 1, 2007). Southwestern Journal of Law and Trade in the Americas. Vol. 13. P. 237, 2007, Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 340, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=980045 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

16. Padilla J. and Ginsburg D.H. and Wong-Ervin K. Antitrust Analysis Involving Intellectual Property and Standards: Implications from Economics (January 10, 2019). Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Fall, 2019, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3119034 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3119034 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

17. Petit N. The Antitrust and Intellectual Property Intersection in European Union Law (June 17, 2016). Handbook of Antitrust, Intellectual Property and High Tech, Roger D. Blair & D. Daniel Sokol (eds.), Cambridge University, 2017, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2796670 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

18. Schumpeter J.A., 1939 Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, New York and London, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pp. 609 - 626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

19. Schumpeter J.A. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle (1934). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1496199 (accessed: 19.10.2020).

20. The Interplay Between Competition Law and Intellectual Property - An International Perspective / G. Muscolo and M. Tavassi (eds.), Kluwer Law International, Forthcoming, George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 18-23, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3237788 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3237788 (accessed: 19.10.2020).