Institute News

In four thematic sections, diagnoses of the status quo are first presented, followed by specific options for policy measures. The statement provides answers to the following questions, among others:

• Effects of the pandemic on the economic structural change: Under what conditions can existing growth potentials be leveraged?
• Possible consequences of the pandemic on the distribution of wealth and social inequality: How can decision-makers respond in the areas of education and training, the fostering of gender equality and the design of the social security net?
• Limits to the performance of public organizations in the crisis: What are their causes and how can they be overcome?
• Sustainability of public finances: What are the reform options for national debt? How relevant is local government financing and investment activity after the pandemic?

More information on the Leopoldina website.

Go directly to the statement (in German).

What direction is the European Union's innovation policy going in? Can legislative proposals such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA) make Europe fit for the digital age? Is the European IP framework still suitable to fulfil its fundamental functions in view of technological disruption? These were the questions addressed at this year's Alumni Conference, which was hosted on 9 July for the 17^th time by the Institute in collaboration with the Alumni Association “Friends and Former Employees of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition”. 
 

Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, for the first time the event took place online. Researchers and Alumni of the Institute as well as external guests from all over the world engaged in fruitful discussions on the current and future European law and policy framework for innovation and competition in digital markets. The conference was opened by welcome addresses of the chairwoman of the Alumni Association, Federica Togo, and the Managing Director of the Institute, Josef Drexl.

The European Union's Competition Policy
 

The first panel dealt with the competition policy of the European Union and was chaired by Dietmar Harhoff, Director of the Institute’s economic department. Cristina Caffarra, Senior Consultant to Charles River Associates and Visiting Professor at University College London, started by providing a critical look at the current competitive landscape and competition law enforcement within the digital world. In her keynote, she raised major concerns regarding, inter alia, structural underenforcement coupled with insufficient regulation, which also fails to properly address privacy concerns. The talk contained a critical look at the proposal for a Digital Markets Act (DMA) and further legislative action in the UK, the US, and Germany, and questioned whether the current regulatory environment helps to foster innovation.
 

In the second keynote of the first panel Rupprecht Podszun, Chair for Civil Law, German and European Competition Law and Director of the Institute for Competition Law at the University of Düsseldorf, spoke about “Taking Decisions on Regulating Big Tech”. He argued for a principled approach that should be followed by policymakers enforcing competition law vis-à-vis Big Tech companies. The presentation focused, inter alia, on the question where such principles come from (e.g. constitutional documents) and on the relationship between competition law and fundamental rights issues, such as personal data protection, sustainability or the protection of consumer autonomy. Within his keynote he discussed different ways of intervention against the backdrop of different market models.
 

The discussion after the first panel focused, for example, on the question which goals the proposed DMA pursues (if any). It was also discussed how a competition policy can be justified that aims at providing consumers with more sovereignty and choice in order to protect competition, but at the same time cuts down the users’ convenience by regulating the conduct of Big Tech companies.

The IP Policy of the EU

The second panel, chaired by Reto M. Hilty, Director at the legal department of the Institute, was devoted to the EU’s IP policy. Katharine Rockett, Professor at the University of Essex, started by laying the economic groundwork on intellectual property protection for data and Artificial Intelligence. She first elaborated on the general preconditions under which IP rights for data may be justified and put a special emphasis on issues of licensing and diffusion. After having illustrated the distinguishing features of data compared to more traditional subject matter for intellectual property protection and the implications of these features for intellectual property design, she made some final remarks on how Artificial Intelligence might alter traditional IP paradigms.
 

Building on this economic foundation, Matthias Leistner, Chair of Private Law and Intellectual Property Law with Information and IT-Law at the University of Munich, gave an overview on both the current IP landscape of the EU and upcoming IP policy reforms from a legal point of view. Against the backdrop of a newly-evolving overall access and portability paradigm in EU law making, he critically examined the protection of database works de lege lata under copyright law, the sui generis right for databases, and trade secrecy rules. He particularly pointed out the need for abolishment or at least substantial reform of the database sui generis right. Leistner then gave an outlook on how the European Commission plans to address this and other existing problems in the course of its upcoming Data Act.
 

The following lively discussion revolved around, inter alia, the problem of over-complex and overlapping regulatory levels to the detriment of small market players, the possibility of introducing new registration systems for as of yet unregistered IP rights, and the advantages of a more unfair competition law oriented approach towards the protection of databases.

Women are still significantly underrepresented in IT professions. Only about 8 percent of all IT apprentices in Germany are female (source: Statistisches Bundesamt, 2020). The IT world of work has traditionally been considered a male domain, even though programming, for example, was still a typical female occupation in the 1980s as busywork for office staff. One exception was the U.S. computer scientist and computer pioneer Grace Hopper who worked with the Mark I, the world’s first fully electronic computer, at Harvard University from the mid-1940s.

There are also economic reasons why policymakers and the industry are trying to attract more women to IT professions: Due to the shortage of skilled workers, vacant IT positions can no longer be filled (source: Handelsblatt) . Nevertheless, young women in the IT sector still have to contend with obstacles and prejudices.

We asked Cristiane Stülp about her personal experiences on her way to becoming an IT specialist and what advice she would give to young women interested in following the same career path.

The young Brazilian with German roots emphasizes that, at the beginning of her path, a certain amount of risk-taking was required to even go to Germany. Her family played an important role. In a way, her older sister, who had completed an agricultural internship in Germany, served as a female role model. Cristiane Stülp had initially planned only a one-year internship – in the meantime, she has been in Germany for almost five years.

The IT specialist reports that her family has an agricultural business in Brazil. However, her parents never mapped out her career path in accordance with their expectations, but were always open to her own career aspirations. One thing she learnt from the agricultural environment was to assert herself. She emphasizes that she is not afraid of working as the only women in a team of men.

Her interest in IT came also from her personal background. Even as a girl, she had to stand up to her brothers to get her fair share of limited computer time. Her partner, who works in the IT sector, always encouraged her to pursue her interests in the field and to look for a vocational training. This again required assertiveness and persistence – both in dealing with the immigration authorities and in the search for a vocational training institution.

When choosing her career, she never had anyone advising her against an IT vocational training – although many were surprised. For her colleagues, too, it was new territory to no longer work only among men – but she never encountered any prejudice or resistance in the IT team, which Cristiane Stülp likes to jokingly call “my guys”. On the contrary, she has experienced great appreciation, support, and encouragement.

Working in a mixed team has proved successful. The IT department would like to recruit more female trainees, but there is a shortage of applicants. In the last round of applications, their share was far below 5 percent. When it comes to internal tasks, Cristiane Stülp also likes to seek out responsibility, for example for the younger apprentices. She believes that it is her specifically “female” quality that she can identify organizational improvement potential and thus contribute to solutions with greater sustainability as part of the team.

Although women tend to have higher exit rates in male-dominated professions (source: Accenture, 2020), Cristiane wants to continue working in the IT field after her training. She is particularly interested in system administration. She is happy to continue working at the Institute after her exams.

The training and examination period during the COVID-19 pandemic brought great additional challenges and also personal losses – Cristiane Stülp overcame all this with great mental strength and maturity. She also emphasizes that it was striking that she encountered very few young female IT trainees in the vocational school environment, but rather independent adult women.

After her successful training, she is first and foremost looking forward to seeing her family in Brazil as soon as this is possible. At the end of the interview, she makes a wonderful closing statement: “I, as a woman here at the Institute, am just happy.” She would take the same path again at any time.

(The interview was conducted by Myriam Rion, Hella Schuster, and Ulrike Garlet.)

The growth of the Institute’s scientific reputation during his tenure is due in great measure to his scientific achievements in the fields of unfair competition and copyright law. With large-scale comparative law studies he laid the foundations for the European harmonisation in unfair competition law, where his primary concern was a consumer-protection orientation of the field. Subsequent generations of scholars associate his name above all with the leading commentary on German copyright law that he founded. Not only was he a pervasive and system-building force in the field of copyright. He also fought for legislative improvements to the contractual protection of authors, while sending clear messages to adversaries. He received many honours for his scientific achievements, chief among them honorary doctorates from the Université Libre de Bruxelles, the University of Stockholm and Yonsei University in Seoul.

In Germany and many other parts of the world one encounters an impressive number of his former PhD candidates and students who today hold leading positions in legal scholarship and practice. Furthermore, as a full professor at the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich one of his highest priorities was always the training of undergraduate students. Thus he did not hesitate to take on the double burden of directing the Institute on his own after the retirement of his colleague and close friend Friedrich-Karl Beier, while at the same time carrying out his main duties at the University until his scheduled retirement date.

Nor were these later years an easy time for the Institute, whose very existence was at stake. Gerhard Schricker succeeded in turning the tide and securing its continuation. This was due primarily to his proposal to establish a globally leading course of studies in intellectual property law in collaboration with partner universities, at the time an attractive science policy move for the Max Planck Society. The appointment of not one but several new directors just after the turn of the millennium and the creation of the degree programme at the Munich Intellectual Property Law Center offered together with the University of Augsburg, TU Munich and George Washington University show that Gerhard Schricker deserves particular gratitude for having paved the way for the Institute’s future.

Most of the Institute’s current employees were not able to get to know Gerhard Schricker personally, as shortly after his retirement ill health forced him to give up his research activities and retire completely into private family life. It is there that he has died after many years of serious illness. He will be remembered by many for his refined mind, his constant and caring support and at the same time for his modest nature.

Personal Webpage of Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Gerhard Schricker

On behalf of the state government of Lower Saxony, a team of experts chaired by Prof. Dietmar Harhoff, Ph.D., Director at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, has developed options for action on how the federal state can respond to current major societal challenges. In the next few years, the course will be set for future developments. 

Eleven renowned scientists had agreed to develop recommendations for the future. The commission took up its work as an independent and autonomous body of experts on 1 July 2019. The highly interdisciplinary panel identified five areas in which the state faces particular challenges, but that also affect other states and countries: (1) demographic developments, (2) climate change, (3) globalization, (4) digitalization, and (5) the preservation of social cohesion. Ten fields of action were examined along these challenges, within which general development trends as well as opportunities and risks for the state were identified.

These fields of action comprise the topics (1) demography and generations, (2) immigration and diversity, (3) work, employment and upskilling, (4) health and care, (5) landscape, energy and climate change, (6) agricultural and food economy, (7) mobility, (8) research and innovation, (9) high-tech strategy, robotics and AI, and (10) digitalization.

Finally, the commission presented particularly relevant options for action and core recommendations. These are intended to help ensure that the state can fully exploit its potential for a future-proof, successful development, and will be economically, socially, and ecologically sustainable in 2030.

The commission submitted the final report with its recommendations to the government of Lower Saxony on 25 March 2021. It is available online on the website of the state of Lower Saxony.

For the third time now, the two-day event was organized by Ph.D. students and Postdocs of the Department for Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research to give young scholars the opportunity to present and discuss their work.

On the first day, the workshop was kicked off with a session on Intellectual Property Rights, followed by sessions on Science of Science and Individuals in the Knowledge Economy. Speakers presented research findings related to the strategic drafting of patents, trademark enforcement and counterfeiting, the effect of government funding on follow-on innovation, and voluntary employee representation and its effects on innovation. The final presentation of the day shed light on the gender innovation gap by analyzing gender differential responses to early patent rejections.

The highlight of the first day was the keynote speech by Rosemarie Ziedonis and Sina Khoshoskhan who presented results on “Forty Years of Research on Intellectual Property and Innovation: Dominant Themes and New Horizons”. An interactive discussion emerged on what makes a scientific paper interesting, stand the test of time, and be considered at the frontier of its field.

The second day offered interesting insights on Firms and Innovation, Takeovers and Investment, as well as AI and Innovation. Young scholars presented research on the global innovation strategies of multinational firms, the impact of common ownership on markups, the innovation effects of killer acquisitions, and the effect of angel investments on corporate innovation. In the last session, the researchers focused on who is shaping AI given the differential access to computing power, and on the barriers to growth firms encounter in developing AI.

See the complete program with all topics here and find the coverage on Twitter under #RISE3Workshop.

The RISE workshop series aims at stimulating a rigorous in-depth discussion of a selected number of research papers by Ph.D. students and Junior Postdocs, providing feedback and connecting with peers from other research institutions. Accordingly, the workshop brings together young researchers from all over Europe and the US with researchers from the Munich Innovation Community.

We thank all participants, including the keynote speakers, discussants and presenters for a truly outstanding RISE3 Workshop 2020. Our special thanks go to the organizing team, especially to Cristina Rujan, Timm Opitz, Kathrin Wernsdorf, and Felix Poege. With great enthusiasm and motivation, we look forward to the RISE4 Workshop 2021 ‒ then hopefully again in person at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in Munich.