Alexander Hamilton’s Alternative: Technology Piracy and the Report on Manufactures

Ben-Atar, Doron S.

doi:10.4324/9781315092621-1

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The scope of discussion on this issue is insufficient because it fails to distinguish private action (violations by individuals and firms) and public action (violations by governments) in IPR violation (Hill & Hult, 2019) and that the distinction between private and public actions is fuzzy -the Chinese party-state is both a player and referee in the game. 1 In countries of early developmental stage, the violation of IPR tends to be by private actors, which is commonly the result of the state lacking laws or the will to enforce them, or the result of the state favoring domestic firms over foreign entities, as in the IPR protection history of developed countries show (Ben-Atar, 1995;Hill & Hult, 2019;SÄ iz & Castro, 2017). In newly independent America, facing British technology embargo, the government of the desperate infant nation encouraged and rewarded Americans to acquire foreign IPR, especially from Britain, legally or illegally (Ben-Atar, 1995).…”

Section: The Rule Of Law View and Our Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the secrecy of IPR violation and the reluctance of victims to report it for fear of retribution and embarrassment (Sullivan, 2019), comprehensive statistics of IPR violation related to the Chinese party-state do not exist, to our knowledge, but circumstantial evidence does exist. Studies using statistical data on China's IPR issues tend to focus on patent application and dispute, because data on patents are easier to get (Bian, 2017;Prud'homme, 2019;Rassenfosse & Raiteri, 2017). The findings are mixed.…”

Section: The Rule Of Law View and Our Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, that is what happened in the U.S. regarding the evolution of IPR protection. Its democratic system allowed and even encouraged the public participation in the IPR protection debate, which, along with U.S.'s economic development and global engagement, counter-balanced the discrimination against foreign IP holders, and facilitated U.S.'s evolution toward a strong IPR protection regime (Ben-Atar, 1995;SÄ iz & Castro, 2017).…”

Section: The Fallacy That China's Ipr Protection Will Improve As Morementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

China’s intellectual property rights provocation: A political economy view

Alon

2019

J Int Bus Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well recognized that intellectual property rights (IPR) violations are at the heart of the economic conflict with China. Little agreement, however, exists about the origin and solutions for this provocation. Broadly speaking, two prescriptions have been proposed: the natural evolutionary and the rule of law views. While both have merits and add to our understanding, they do not go far enough to address the more fundamental IPR policy issue: China has benefited from a rule of law overseas and a rule through law at home, manufacturing unfair advantage to its firms, many of which are owned and/or influenced by the government. While recognizing China's recent effort in improving IPR protection, we point out the intrinsic contradiction in the political economy of China between maintaining the one-party rule, on the one hand, and protecting IPR by an independent court, on the other. Understanding this tension in the application of IPR law can help the international community search for more effective policy options.

show abstract

Section: The Rule Of Law View and Our Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Rule Of Law View and Our Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Fallacy That China's Ipr Protection Will Improve As Morementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation