Events

Intellectual Property as Loan Collateral

Presenter: David Heller (Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition)

Discussant: Annabelle Haché Harter (TUM)

Technology Governance as Selection Criterion: The Case of Smart Cities

Presenter: Lucia Baur (TUM)

Discussant: Safia Bouacha (ISTO)

Using novel and large-scale data, we reassess two claims on the effect of a connection to the editorial board of an economics journal and propose a new mechanism. Rather than editors helping departmental colleagues, the connection is particularly beneficial for the joining board members themselves; the impact on departmental colleagues who are not coauthors of the editor is comparatively small. Rather than a marked increase in quality thanks to connections, we find no such increase, if any, there is evidence of favouritism among journals with little editorial board rotation.

Contact: Michael E. Rose

As access to the internet is essential for digital business models and applications, sound regulation of the internet is crucial for promoting digital innovation and fully reaping the social benefits of digitalization. Regulation of the internet has to take account of the dynamic evaluation of communication technologies, business models and the markets. Against this backdrop, the Institute organizes a workshop to bring together different stakeholders and experts to develop a better understanding of the internet in view of guiding future regulation.

Recent research and popular debate suggest that there can be a positive relationship between diversity, or differences in team member characteristics, and performance in novel problem-solving. In this study, we take steps to disambiguate the causal effects of knowledge diversity versus demographic diversity (gender, race, age) on innovation performance. We report on a field experiment in which 834 adults engaged in an inherently multi-disciplinary product development problem. Team composition was randomly assigned, as was the degree to which teams were primed to engage in a collaborative orientation and work style. We find that performance effects of knowledge and demographic diversity are—to a striking degree—statistically separate, independent, and qualitatively distinct. Consistent with prior literature, the results indicate largely distinct implications of diversity on knowledge integration versus group problem-solving processes. Apart from this main goal of disambiguating diversity effects most broadly, the study contributes a series of results on causal effects of knowledge, gender, race, and age diversity in a field experimental context.

Contact: Svenja Friess

The Digital Services Act (DSA) sets out numerous “due diligence” obligations for intermediaries concerning any type of illegal information. Copyright infringing content arguably is illegal content under the DSA, and accounts empirically for most take-down decisions by intermediaries. New rules on notice-and-action (Art. 14), statement of reasons (Art. 15), trusted flaggers (Art. 19), and measures and protection against misuse (Art. 20) add a level of specificity not found in the e-Commerce Directive (ECD), nor in the lex specialis of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive (Art. 17, CDSM). The UK chose not to implement the CDSM Directive, nor is the infringement of intellectual property rights a relevant offence that triggers new “duty of care” obligations under the Online Safety Bill published on 17 March 2022 (section 52(8)). However, the Bill also abandons the (Art. 15, ECD) prohibition of “general monitoring”, endorsing “proactive technology” and instituting a new regulatory system based on “codes of practice”. Codes of practice are essentially terms of service negotiated between “high-risk, high-reach” platforms and the regulator Ofcom, with significant executive powers for the Secretary of State. In contrast the proposed EU Digital Services Act only includes vague references to such self- and co-regulatory agreements under Art. 35 (“The Commission and the Board shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation”, with a focus on tackling “different types of illegal content and systemic risks”) and under Art. 36 (relating to online advertising). This talk will discuss opportunities and potential pitfalls for Copyright policy from these emerging Codes. Codes of practice and Codes of conduct imply ongoing revision and flexibility, which makes them a potentially attractive regulatory tool for fast developing industries and markets. Unlike statutes, Codes do not involve a complex legislative procedure. They can be more responsive to changing circumstances. On the other hand, a Code’s legal standing and enforcement conditions are often uncertain. State functions may be delegated to private firms without democratic scrutiny and appropriate procedural safeguards.

Contact: Marina Chugunova

Monday, 13 June 2022
Chairs: Hanns Ullrich and Ansgar Ohly

Welcome
Dietmar Harhoff

Grand Challenges, Technology and IP: The Case of Global Food Security
Axel Metzger (Humboldt University Berlin)

Intellectual Property in the Circular Economy
Maria Lillà Montagnani (Bocconi University Milan)

IP and Transparency in an Algorithmic Society
Tanya Aplin (King’s College London)

Value Pluralism in Intellectual Property Law: Participation Rights in the Innovation and Information Ecosystem
Martin Senftleben (University of Amsterdam)

Tuesday, 14 June 2022
Chairs: Annette Kur and Josef Drexl

Radical Changes, Trends, and Constants: The Calibration of Intellectual Property Law
Marketa Trimble (University of Nevada, Las Vegas)

Why the Structure and Direction of Innovation Matters – ‘Another View of the Cathedral’
Matthias Leistner (University of Munich)

Back to Square One: Intellectual Property for the Common Good
Katharina de la Durantaye (Free University Berlin)

(Re-)Constructing IP Rights in Unsettled Times: The Multilateral Task of IP Scholarship
Michael Grünberger (University of Bayreuth)

Conclusion and Farewell
Josef Drexl

The Munich Summer Institute (MSI) is hosted by the Center for Law & Economics at ETH Zurich, the Chair for Technology and Innovation Management at TUM, the Chair for Economics of Innovation at TUM, the Institute for Strategy, Technology and Organization at the LMU Munich and the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition.

Please find further information at the website of the MSI.

Prior research, primarily based on lab experiments, suggests that females might be more averse to competition than males and could be more inclined towards collaboration, instead. Were these findings to generalize to adults across the workforce, there could be profound implications for organizational theory and practice. This paper reports on a field experiment in which adults from a wide range of fields and ages were invited to join a product development opportunity. Individuals were randomly assigned to treatments framing the opportunity as either involving competitive or collaborative interactions with other participants. Among those outside of science, technology, engineering, and math fields (STEM), we find significant gender differences in willingness to participate under competition. Among those in STEM fields, we detect no statistical gender differences. These results and broader patterns documented in the study are consistent with significant heterogeneity in competitiveness across both men and women, with field and career sorting resulting in differences (in gender differences) across fields.

Contact: Rainer Widmann

Modern Development of Intellectual Property Acquis in the European Union and Approximation of Ukrainian Legislation to the EU Acquis
Dr. of Legal Sciences, D.J.S. Yuriy Kapitsa

Enforcement of Competition Law and the Digital Markets Act
Dr. Nataliia Mazaraki

Intellectual Property Law and Work-Like AI-Assisted and AI-Generated Objects
Kateryna Militsyna

Right to Remuneration of Authors under Copyright Law of Ukraine and the EU: Ways of Harmonisation
Assist. Prof. Dr. Liubov Maidanyk

The Balance between Intellectual Property Rights on Distinctive Signs and the Public Interests in a Globalising World
Assoc. Prof. Valentyna Kryzhna

NOBILIS: Research Institute Concept Development
Anastasiia Lutsenko, Ph.D. (ABD)

Development of the Strategy of Internationalization of Technology Transfer in the Transnational Space: Analytical Forecasting, Modelling of Challenges and Prospects
Dr. of Economics Iryna Novikova

Commercialization of Socially Significant Medical Innovations and Related Intellectual Property Rights
Prof. Dr. Liudmyla Petrenko

Innovation for social progress (ISP) – innovation that addresses society’s greatest challenges, like climate change, education, and healthcare – is characterized by a unique double-externality challenge. Imperfect appropriability, which generates knowledge spillovers and applies to innovation of all types, but also production and consumption externalities, which lead to prices not fully reflecting the costs and benefits to society. In this paper, we posit that these two market failures are interdependent and show how this changes the expected effects of each on ISP relative to when they are considered in silos. We then test the theoretical predictions by estimating the effects of knowledge spillovers and carbon pricing – capturing the two market failures and their interactions – on green and dirty innovation in the United Kingdom’s energy, transportation, and manufacturing sectors. Using instrumental variable and difference-in-discontinuities approaches, we find that, while carbon pricing generally increases green innovation, knowledge spillovers attenuate this effect. Technology-neutral R&D tax credits aiming to address the appropriability challenge do as well. Our findings highlight the importance of considering market failure interdependence when designing policy that aims to steer the direction of innovation.

Contact: Cristina Rujan