¬ã°Q¤é´Á

2010¦~12¤ë4¤é10:30 ~ 12:00

¬ã°Q¦aÂI

¥x¤jªÀ·|¬ì¾Ç°|26±Ð«Ç

°Q½×ÃD¥Ø

ÃD¥Ø

§@ªÌ

¤åÄm¥X³B

The Purification-Straw Theory of IPR Protection

Kim-Sau Chung & Chia-Hui Lu

Working paper

³ø§i¤H

Chia-Hui Lu

°Ñ¥[¤H­û

§f¨Î¼z¡B¶ÀÂE¡B±ç¤åºa¡BªL¿P²Q¡B§dªÛ¤å¡B¤ý¥ú¥¿¡B©P¦Bº½¡B¤ý¨ÎµX¡B´^¥¿¯E¡B²ø´_½å¡B©P«~¦°¡B±ä¥j¾s¡B®}¹t¡B°ª°ê峯¡B¼B«G§g¡B¤ý¬ý³Ç¡B½²©úªÚ¡BÄÁ暳³®¡BÒ\¥ú»õ¡B¤B­i¤¯¡B¬IÎr¥þ

ºK­n

Purification straw is a product developed and sold for profit by innovators from the North, but consumed only at the South. We develop a framework that incorporates products like this. In our model, consumers at North and South have the same

preference, but different incomes lead them to consume different baskets. When North is richer, innovation activities shift from low-end products to high-end ones, benefiting the well-off countries at the South, but hurting the truly poor ones. The conventional wisdom that South benefits more from pirating than from IPR protection is correct only for those well-off members. The truly poor ones are better off protecting IPR in order to encourage ¡§inventing for the other 90%¡¨. This fits the robust empirical fact that intended IPR protection is a U-shape function of country incomes. Northern

innovators are unlikely to advocate in one voice for stronger IPR protection in the truly poor countries, however.