A Study of Competition Law and Intellectual Property in the EU: Comparative Perspectives in Licensing Agreements
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Although competition or antitrust laws in different jurisdictions vary in enforcement, they have an unambiguous factor in common. That is the control on the oppressive use of market power. Therefore, implementation of competition law means challenging the firms that possess market power or exercise a similar power through agreements. Powers by means of intellectual property rights (IPRs) are no exception. It is true that there has been a never-ending conflicting opinion which has persistently claimed antitrust challenges for protecting the process of innovation by a vigorous competition. The intersection of IPRs and antitrust has, therefore, brought attention to scholars. One of the main objectives of competition law is to improve competition in the market, by means of preventing acts of abuse of market dominance or anti-competitive agreements. On the contrary, the IPRs allow firms to stimulate invention through permitting IP owners to exploit their market power. This seems that there is some conflict between these two areas. However, they are understood as in harmony since both eventually aim at achieving the goal for social welfare or efficiency. For this complex reason, most countries that legislate competition law also provide exemption regulations or guidelines for approving benign technology licensing. This article studies various legal techniques in the EU, the US, and Korea, illustrating the convergence through establishing the regulations and guidelines. It is somewhat difficult to decide whether positive outcome from a certain licensing agreement can offset anti-competitive one. However, a study of comparative law can offer a significant and diverse answers for the problem. Therefore, this article aims to provide a better solution for the existing problems in antitrust provisions on IPRs. This article explains the substantive law of EU competition law, including the unique block exemption provision on technology transfer, and compares it with reference to the current provisions on IPRs in the US and Korea. Then, it discusses the benefits from learning the EU block exemption regulation for its legal certainty outcomes. The provisions of the EU have proved their positive outcomes such as ensuring legal certainty through market share threshold guidance with hard-core prohibition. The Korean competition authorities can learn much from these legal techniques.
Abstract
Although competition or antitrust laws in different jurisdictions vary in enforcement, they have an unambiguous factor in common. That is the control on the oppressive use of market power. Therefore, implementation of competition law means challenging the firms that possess market power or exercise a similar power through agreements. Powers by means of intellectual property rights (IPRs) are no exception. It is true that there has been a never-ending conflicting opinion which has persistently claimed antitrust challenges for protecting the process of innovation by a vigorous competition. The intersection of IPRs and antitrust has, therefore, brought attention to scholars. One of the main objectives of competition law is to improve competition in the market, by means of preventing acts of abuse of market dominance or anti-competitive agreements. On the contrary, the IPRs allow firms to stimulate invention through permitting IP owners to exploit their market power. This seems that there is some conflict between these two areas. However, they are understood as in harmony since both eventually aim at achieving the goal for social welfare or efficiency. For this complex reason, most countries that legislate competition law also provide exemption regulations or guidelines for approving benign technology licensing. This article studies various legal techniques in the EU, the US, and Korea, illustrating the convergence through establishing the regulations and guidelines. It is somewhat difficult to decide whether positive outcome from a certain licensing agreement can offset anti-competitive one. However, a study of comparative law can offer a significant and diverse answers for the problem. Therefore, this article aims to provide a better solution for the existing problems in antitrust provisions on IPRs. This article explains the substantive law of EU competition law, including the unique block exemption provision on technology transfer, and compares it with reference to the current provisions on IPRs in the US and Korea. Then, it discusses the benefits from learning the EU block exemption regulation for its legal certainty outcomes. The provisions of the EU have proved their positive outcomes such as ensuring legal certainty through market share threshold guidance with hard-core prohibition. The Korean competition authorities can learn much from these legal techniques.
참고문헌 (71)
- Anderman, Steven, "The IP and Competition Interface: New Developments, In Intellectual Property and Competition Law", pp.3~25 (2011), Oxford University Press
- Anderman, Steven, "EU Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights: The Regulation of Innovation, Second Edition" (2011), Oxford University
- Areeda, "Antitrust Analysis: Problems, Text, and Cases, Sixth Edition" (2004), Aspen
- Arquit, "Canaries in the Coal Mine: Has Neo-Classical Economics Lost Ground at the Intersection of IP Licensing and Antitrust Law in the United States?”, in Intellectual Property and Competition Law", pp.433~460 (2011), Oxford University
- Barnard, "The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms" (2004), Oxford University
- Bernard, Catherine, "The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms, Third Edition" (2010), Oxford University
- Bishop, "The Economics of EC Competition Law: Concepts, Application and Measurement, Third Edition" (2010), Sweet & Maxwell
- Bork, Robert, "The Antitrust Paradox: Policy at War with Itself" (1993), Free
- Brodley, "The Economic Goals of Antitrust: Efficiency, Consumer Welfare, and Technological Progress", New York University Law Review, 62, pp.1020~1031 (1987)
- Burtis, Michelle, "Intellectual Property and Antitrust Limitations on Contract, In Dynamic Competition and Public Policy: Technology, Innovation, and Antitrust Issues", pp.229~263 (2005), Cambridge University Press
- Buttigieg, "Competition Law: Safeguarding the Consumer Interest: A Comparative Analysis of US Antitrust Law and EC Competition Law" (2009), Alphen aan den Rijn
- Carlton, Dennis, "Modern Industrial Organization, Fourth Edition" (2005), Addison-Wesley
- Carrier, "Innovation for the 21st Century: Harnessing the Power of Intellectual Property and Antitrust Law" (2009), Oxford University
- 최요섭, "The Vertical Regulation of Economics in the EU: Ten Years of Experience", 경쟁법연구, 21, pp.185~215 (2010), 한국경쟁법학회
- Choi, Yo Sop, "The Enforcement and Development of Korean Competition Law", World Competition: Law and Economics Review, 33(2), pp.301~315 (2010)
- Choi, Yo Sop, "Adoption of New Block Exemption Regulations in the European Union", HUFS Global Law Review, 2(1), pp.59~74 (2010)
- 최요섭, "EU Competition Policy Via Controlling State Aid", International Area Studies Review, 13(2), pp.303~322 (2010), 국제지역연구센터
- 최요섭, "The Meaning of Consumer Welfare in Competition Law Revisited", 외법논집, 34(3), pp.215~237 (2010), 법학연구소
- Choi, Yo Sop, "Analysis of the Microsoft, Intel and Qualcomm Decisions in Korea", European Competition Law Review, 31(11), pp.470~475 (2010)
- Choi, Yo Sop, "Comparative Analysis of Competition Laws on Buyer Power in Korea and Japan", World Competition: Law and Economics Review, 33(3), pp.499~519 (2010)
- Dabbah, Maher M, "International and Comparative Competition Law" (2010), Cambridge University
- Drexl, "Real Knowledge is to Know the Extent of One’s Own Ignorance: On the Consumer Harm Approach in Innovation-Related Competition Cases", Antitrust Law Journal, 76(1), pp.677~708 (2010)
- Elhauge, Einer, "United States Antitrust Law and Economics", pp.2008, Thomson
- Elhauge, "Global Competition Law and Economics" (2007), Hart Publishing
- 2004, In Intellectual Property and Competition Law, "Hardcore Restrictions in Technology Transfer Agreements under Regulation (EC) 722", pp.2011, Enchelmaier, Stefan
- Fox, Eleanor, "Competition Law, In International Economic Law, Second Edition", pp.417~464 (2008), Oxford University Press
- Fox, Eleanor, "How the Chicago School Overshot the Mark: The Effect of Conservative Economic Analysis on U.S", pp.77~88 (2008), Oxford University
- Fox, Eleanor, "The Competition Law of the European Union: In Comparative Perspective" (2009), West, St. Paul
- Fox, Eleanor, "Global Issues in Antitrust and Competition Law" (2010), Paul, MN
- Francis, Daniel, "Exclusion, Invasion and Abuse: Competition Law and Its Constitutional Context, In The Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies", pp.183~224 (2010), Hart Publishing
- Furse, Mark, "Competition Law of the EC and UK, Sixth Edition" (2008), Oxford Press
- Gavil, Andrew, "Antitrust Law in Perspective: Cases, Concepts and Problems in Competition Law, Second Edition", pp.2008, Thomson
- Gerber, David J, "Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe: Protecting Prometheus" (2003), Oxford University
- Gerber, David, "Competition Law and the WTO: Rethinking the Relationship”, in The Future of International Economic Law", pp.269~286 (2008), Oxford University
- Gilbert, Richard J, "Ties That Bind: Policies to Promote (Good) Patent Pools", Antitrust Law Journal, 77(1), pp.1~48 (2010)
- Goetz, Charles J, "Antitrust Law: Interpretation and Implementation" (2009), Foundation Press
- Hartley, T.C, "The Foundations of European Union Law: An Introduction to the Constitutional and Administrative Law of the European Union, Seventh Edition" (2010), Oxford University
- Hovenkamp, Herbert, "The Antitrust Enterprise: Principles and Execution" (2005), Harvard University
- Hovenkamp, Herbert, "Federal Antitrust Policy: The Law of Competition and Its Practice, Third Edition" (2005), Paul, MN
- Hylton, Keith, "Antitrust Law: Economic Theory and Common Law Tradition" (2003), Cambridge University
- Jones, Alison, "EU Competition Law: Text, Cases, and Materials, Fourth Edition" (2011), Oxford University
- Jorde, Thomas, "Innovation, Cooperation, and Antitrust”, in Antitrust, Innovation, and Competitiveness", pp.47~70 (1992), in Jorde,Thomas & Teece,David(editors),Antitrust,Innovation,and Competitiveness,Oxford University Press,New York
- Kallay, Dina, "The Law and Economics of Antitrust and Intellectual Property: An Austrian Approach" (2004), Edward Elgar
- Kennedy, Kevin, "Competition Law and the World Trade Organization: The Limits of Multilateralism" (2001), Sweet & Maxwell
- Landes, William, "The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law" (2003), Harvard University
- Leslie, Christopher, "Antitrust Law and Intellectual Property Rights: Cases and Materials" (2011), Oxford University
- Lopatka, John, "Monopolization, Innovation, and Consumer Welfare", George Washington Law Review, 69, pp.367~424 (2001)
- Marco Colino, Sandra, "Vertical Agreements and Competition Law: A Comparative Study of the EU and US Regimes" (2010), Hart
- Maher, Imelda, "Competition Law Modernization: An Evolution Tale?, In The Evolution of EU Law, Second Edition", pp.717~741 (2011), Oxford University Press
- Merges, Robert P, "Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age, Fourth Edition" (2007), Wolters Kluwer
- Myers, Gary, "The Intersection of Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Cases and Materials" (2007), Paul, MN
- Pitofsky, Robert, "Trade Regulation: Cases and Materials, Sixth Edition" (2010), Foundation Press
- Posner, Richard, "Antitrust Law, Second Edition" (2001), University of Chicago
- Posner, Richard, "Antitrust in the New Economy", Antitrust Law Journal, 68, pp.925~943 (2001)
- "Harper-Perennial" (1976)
- Shapiro, Carl, "Technology Cross-Licensing Practices: FTC v. Intel (1999), In The Antitrust Revolution: Economics, Competition, and Policy, Fourth Edition", pp.350~372 (1999), Oxford University Press
- Slot, "An Introduction to Competition Law" (2006), Hart
- Sullivan, "The Law of Antitrust: An Integrated Handbook, Second Edition" (2006), Paul, MN
- Viscusi, "Economics of Regulation and Antitrust, Fourth Edition" (2005), MIT
- Whish, "Recent Developments in Community Competition Law 1998", 99, 2000, pp.25(3), 219~246
- Whish, "Competition Law, Sixth Edition" (2009), Oxford University
- "An Introduction to Comparative Law, Third Edition", pp.1998~, Oxford University
- Choi, Sung-Jai, "Regulation on the Patent Misuse through Antitrust Law" (2010), Sechang
- 최승재, "지식재산권 부당한 행사에 대한 현행 가이드라인에 관한 연구", 경쟁법연구, 22, pp.307~337 (2010), 한국경쟁법학회
- Shin, Hyun Yoon, "Economic Law (Kyoung-jae-beob), Third Edition" (2010), Beobmunsa
- "EU Commission"[URL]
- "Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition"[URL]
- "Intellectual Property and Antitrust"[URL]