On May 18, the United States Supreme Court decided two intellectual property cases with two seemingly different results. A closer look, however, reveals a complimentary concern with the monopolistic power of first movers and how the legal system should enable innovation from second movers over time, writes Randy Picker.
In new research, David Audretsch, Christian Fisch, Chiara Franzoni, Paul P. Momtaz, and Silvio Vismara find that the decline of academic freedom over the last decade has had a deleterious impact on innovation, as measured by the quantity and quality of new patents.
Startups are a major driver of innovation, but many startups are acquired by large incumbents. Do these acquisitions stifle innovation or promote it? While...
Breaking up companies that antitrust regulators consider too dominant can be costly and might negatively impact innovation and consumer welfare. As economists and policymakers...
A 2000 amendment to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act made it easier for firms to merge without notifying US antitrust authorities. In new research, Giovanni Morzenti...
The US Food and Drug Administration is tasked with protecting consumers from unsafe food and medical products. In new research, Parker Rogers finds that...
Antitrust misunderstands innovation by focusing almost entirely on incentives to innovate to the neglect of questions regarding the ability to innovate through sharing knowledge...
Far from their self-promoted image as the world’s most innovative companies, the major tech platforms stifle plenty of innovation and invest in innovations that...
Patent databases may be a smoke screen that hides the true issues, problems, and dynamics of innovation behind the illusion that innovation is booming—and...