Events

We present a new platform for large scale networks experiments in continuous time and conduct three experiments on it: groups range from 8 all the way to 100 subjects. These experiments involve pure linking games as well as games with linking and public goods provision.

The major finding is that subjects create sparse networks that are almost always highly efficient. In some cases networks have a very unequal distribution of connections and exhibit small average distances, while in others subjects create equal and dispersed large distance networks. In some cases highly connected nodes earn vastly more while in other cases they earn significantly less than their less connected cohort. Informational overload helps in explaining why highly connected nodes make excessive investments but earn less than the spokes. (Joint work with Syngjoo Choi and Frédéric Moisan)

Contact Person: Michael E. Rose

The conference will be held in English and will contain of the following four parts:

Panel 1: Intellectual Property as a Complex Adaptive System
Panel 2: Governance of Production and Technologies
Panel 3: Adjudication, Justice and Enforcement
Panel 4: Allocation of Rights, Actors and Institutions

Detailed agenda and registration form for the conference can be found under the following link: Conference Website.
Interested parties are kindly invited to register by 22 June 2020. On completion of the online registration form, participants will receive a link to connect to the event.

Join each session individually, or the entire event, to learn about the role of IP for Europe’s innovation society and discuss with EIPIN-Innovation Society PhD researchers.

Virtual Talk (on invitation)

Using a unique dataset that links economics professors with their publications and the citations to those publications, we document a surprising fact: the financial reward (in terms of academic salary) is substantially higher for joint work, rather than being discounted (or prorated). This finding is robust to different specifications, although we find some support for the idea that the coauthorship premium is due to the fact that joint work is better, in the sense that it is more influential. We also examine the publications of these authors. We find strong evidence that coauthored work is more important, even after controlling for author fixed effects and journal fixed effects. Our estimates imply that coauthored publications receive about 75 percent more citations than sole-authored ones, even after accounting for the author and the journal in which it is published.

Contact Person: Michael E. Rose

The talk will take place on Zoom. Please register here in advance: Registration

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting on Zoom.

Abstract

This presentation addresses the hottest topic in EU copyright law and policy: Article 17 of the new Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive (2019/790). The CDSM Directive is the culmination of a controversial political and legislative process at EU level. None of its provisions has caused greater debate than Article 17, which introduces a new liability regime for “online content-sharing service providers”. These include most user-generated content platforms hosting copyright-protected content accessed daily by millions of individuals in the EU and across the globe (e.g. YouTube, Facebook, Vimeo, TikTok, SoundCloud).

Even before the CDSM Directive is implemented into national law, the issues surrounding Article 17 have already spilled out to the policy and judicial arenas. At the policy level, the debates taking place in a number of Commission-led Stakeholder Dialogues have laid bare many of the unresolved challenges ahead for national legislators and courts. At the judicial level, the Polish government has already filed an action for annulment with the CJEU under Article 263 TFEU, focusing on the most problematic aspects of Article 17.

This presentation will first place Article 17 into its broader EU policy context of the discus-sion on the responsibilities of online platforms – from the agenda on “Tackling Illegal Content Online” to the Digital Services Act – and the narrow copyright context regarding the liability of intermediary platforms for third-party content they host. This will be followed by and explanation of the complex mechanics of Article 17 and an identification of some of its fundamental problems. Finally, some tentative proposals will be advanced for how to begin to address such problems, focusing on the core issues of licensing mechanisms and fundamental rights safeguards.

Speaker Info

Dr. João Pedro Quintais (Portugal), Class of 2010/11 (MIPLC)

João Pedro Quintais is a postdoctoral researcher and lecturer at the Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam. His research focuses on information law matters, including intellectual property, intermediary liability, content moderation, and the regulation of new technologies.

Among other projects, he is currently leading a work package on “Copyright Content Moderation in the Digital Single Market: What Impact on Access to Culture?”, in the context of the Horizon 2020-funded project “ReCreating Europe”.

He is a member of the Blockchain & Society Policy Research Lab, the Information, Communication & the Data Society (ICDS) initiative, and managing editor of the Kluwer Copyright Blog.

Profile & publications: https://www.ivir.nl/employee/quintais/ │Email: j.p.quintais(at)uva.nl │ SSRN: https://tinyurl.com/ycp35oo3  │ Twitter: @jpquintais

From 2 to 4 June 2020, the Center for Law & Economics at ETH Zurich, the Chair for Technology and Innovation Management at TUM, the Institute for Strategy, Technology and Organization at LMU Munich and the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition will jointly organize the fifth Munich Summer Institute.

The Summer Institute will focus on three areas:

• Digitization, Strategy and Organization
  (chairs: Jörg Claussen and Tobias Kretschmer),
• Innovation and Entrepreneurship
  (chairs: Dietmar Harhoff, Joachim Henkel and Hanna Hottenrott), and
• Law & Economics of Intellectual Property and Innovation
  (chair: Stefan Bechtold).

The goal of the Munich Summer Institute is to stimulate a rigorous in-depth discussion of a select number of research papers and to strengthen the interdisciplinary international research community in these areas. Researchers in economics, law, management and related fields at all stages of their career (from Ph.D. students to full professors) may attend the Munich Summer Institute as presenters in a plenary or a poster session, as discussants or as attendants. The Munich Summer Institute will feature three keynote lectures, 18 plenary presentations and a daily poster session (including a poster slam). Paper presentations will be grouped by topics, not discipline or method. The Munich Summer Institute will be held at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities in the heart of Munich. Participation is by invitation only. The organizers will fund travel and hotel expenses for all plenary speakers and hotel expenses for all poster presenters and invited discussants.

Keynote speakers are:

• Pierre Regibeau (European Commission)
• Reinhilde Veugelers (KU Leuven)
• Christopher Sprigman (NYU)

Paper submission procedure

Researchers who would like to present a paper are invited to submit their paper online until 29 February 2020, at  http://editorialexpress.com/conference/msi2020. The Munich Summer Institute only considers papers which have not been published or accepted for publication at the date of submission. Paper selections will be announced in early April 2020. The program of the Munich Summer Institute will be available in early May 2020. Final papers will be made available to conference participants on a public website, and are due on 1 May 2020. Researchers who would like to attend the Munich Summer Institute without giving a presentation should contact one of the organizers by 1 May 2020.

Further information

More information is available at the MSI website. Any questions concerning the Munich Summer Institute should be directed to Stefan Bechtold, Jörg Claussen, Dietmar Harhoff, Joachim Henkel, Hanna Hottenrott or Tobias Kretschmer.

Virtual Talk (on invitation)

Defying global trends, non-university public research organizations (PROs) continue to be key players in Germanys research landscape. As part of their activities, they provide the work environment for large numbers of Ph.D. students who are then graduated by universities. Similarly, private-sector firms employ substantial numbers of industrial Ph.D. students. Both PROs and the private sector thus help provide human capital for the German system of research and innovation, even though their contribution has been difficult to assess due to limited data availability. In this paper, we employ a unique dataset based on a large-scale record linkage approach to trace how the roles of PROs and firms in doctoral training developed over the past two decades. Our results for about 50,000 STEM Ph.D.s graduated from 1995 to 2013 indicate that across cohorts, increasing shares of STEM Ph.D.s remain employed in academia upon graduation. This trend is accompanied by diminishing shares of Ph.D.s obtaining high incomes, and it is even more pronounced for PhDs who did their dissertation research at PROs. In contrast, we observe a low and over time decreasing probability of industrial PhDs to migrate into academia. Despite reforms aimed at increasing the vertical differentiation of the university sector, our data do not suggest an increasing premium of being trained at top-tier universities. We also study the attainment of leadership and research positions and analyze a subsample of regionally immobile Ph.D.s to explore how strategic location choices relate to the observed patterns.

Contact Person: Michael E. Rose

Virtual Talk (on invitation)

We assess the heterogeneous impact of economic downturns on individuals’ decisions to bring high-technology ideas to the market in the form of new ventures. We thereby examine how worsening labor market conditions influence individuals’ opportunity costs of starting new ventures, the resulting composition of the entrepreneurial pool, and startup performance outcomes. Using a rich dataset of startup founders in the biotechnology and medical device sectors, we find that an increase in the unemployment rate is associated with a substantial rise in the share of entrepreneurs who are most sensitive to worsening labor market conditions. Additionally, we find that startups founded by these entrepreneurs display lower financial and innovative performance than startups founded by entrepreneurs who are relatively insensitive to business cycles. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that individuals’ heterogeneous response to worsening labor market conditions is a relevant factor in explaining the negative relationship between unemployment and startup performance outcomes. (Joint work with Annamaria Conti, HEC Lausanne)

Contact Person: Felix Pöge

Virtual Talk (on invitation)

Does the added attention associated with scientific prizes have a positive impact on citations to winners’ pre-award articles? The answer has implications for how prizes influence innovation, and whether trade-offs exist when award frequency changes. Using article level citation data associated with matched winner/control paper pairs, we find that the Nobel Prize announcements in economics result in substantial citation benefits for pre-award papers. These benefits are increasing in the distance from the core economics audience. Insiders pay greatest attention to consensus papers cited by the Nobel Prize Committee and written by past Clark Medal winners; outsiders focus more on consensus papers not written by Clark Medal awardees. In both cases, the entry of new citing authors accounts for most of the enhanced attention. We also examine the direct impact of the Clark Medal on citations and find effects comparable to those arising with the Nobel Prize. (Joint work with Zakaria Babutsidze, SKEMA)

Contact Person: Felix Pöge

Virtual Talk (on invitation)

Laws protecting intellectual property rights balance interests of earlier and later rights holders. The tradeoffs are well established for patents. We argue that similar considerations apply to trademarks. Jurisdictions differ in how strongly they protect earlier rights, with EU trademark law protecting the registered use of an earlier right for much longer than US trademark law. Laws in both jurisdictions seek to eventually align registered use of earlier rights with their actual use, creating space on the trademark register for later rights. Data from a recent reform of trademark fees reveal that registered and actual use of EU marks frequently fail to align as intended. We analyse trademark opposition cases at EUIPO to test whether this creates costs for owners of later rights. We find that a subset of firms relies on the protection afforded to earlier rights to permanently expand the breadth of their marks beyond actual use, limiting access to trademarks for later applicants. We discuss policy implications. (Joint work with Stuart J.H. Graham, Georgia Tech, and Amanda Myers, USPTO)

Contact Person: Fabian Gaessler
 

Organizer: Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, University of Buenos Aires (UBA)