Intellectual Property Rights Protection, Foreign Technology Introduction and FDI- Based on the Provincial-Level Panel Data of China

The article is devoted to the issues of coverage of intellectual property protection. Ukrainian and partially European legislation is analyzed. The main theoretical and practical problems related to the protection of intellectual property are highlighted. The main legal aspects and their role in solving the problems are highlighted, as well as a comparison of intellectual property law and property rights. This article describes the trends in the legal development of the institution of intellectual property, as well as the possibility of its improvement and acceleration through an updated mechanism for its protection. Prospects for the development of legal techniques in the field of intellectual property protection are covered, some innovations are proposed, in particular, insurance of intellectual property, as well as their role and main directions of work on them. The article considers the problem of judicial protection of intellectual property rights through national and international judicial bodies, comparison of their powers and capabilities in terms of recommendations of international organizations, including WIPO. A comparison was made on the main aspects of the basic concepts and concepts of protection of property rights and intellectual property rights, on the basis of which differences and legal aspects of their use are considered. Possible negative and positive aspects of protection of intellectual property rights under the legislation of Ukraine and the possibility of bringing it into line with European legislation, which is potentially important due to the likely accession of Ukraine to the European Union.

The intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection of a country plays a critical role in the decision of multinationals to open a subsidiary in the host country. Tightening the IPRs protection may change the activity of these subsidiaries in the way international knowledge flow between the home and host country… This paper examines the impact of strong intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection on the knowledge flow between the U.S. and host countries of U.S. affiliates. We use patent citations to examine whether the spillover of technology between the host countries and the U.S. is accelerated by strong IPRs protection. The results suggest that the protection favor innovative efforts of domestic firms in host countries rather than U.S. affiliates. Thus, the IPRs protection promotes the knowledge flow from the U.S. to host countries.

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the author's proposals are formulated. Keywords: civil law, intellectual property, lawsuit, protection

As an institutional guarantee of technology and innovation, intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection at the national and supranational level has long been an important focus of economics and politics. However, very few studies have examined IPRs protection in the fields of geography and urban studies. Thus, this study aims to investigate IPRs protection within evolutionary economic geography (EEG) by highlighting the effect of economic transition. Taking Huaihai Economic Zone (HEZ), in China, as a sample, the study uses spatial multi-level modelling to better understand the impacts of the threefold process of economic transition (i.e., decentralisation, marketisation and globalisation) on IPRs protection. Our analysis reveals important new insights including: (1) the horizontal spatial distribution of IPRs protection is uneven both horizontally and vertically, and it has significant spatial hotspots; (2) The driving force of China’s internal marketisation and decentralisation policy positively influences IPRs protection, unlike in the Global North, because strong IPRs protection is not suitable for the economic conditions of countries in the Global South due to the negative effects of globalisation; (3) Economic transition has a major influence on IPRs protection at the prefectural level, but not at the provincial level. The contributions of the study are twofold: theoretically, it is one of the first paper to examine IPRs protection at the sub-national level within the framework of EEG, and to use the triangular process of economic transformation to explain the resulting institutional changes. Methodologically, based on the theoretical underpinnings of our study, we take different administrative levels and autocorrelation into consideration in our model.

This thesis mainly studies the relationship between intellectual property rights protection and recorded music sales by use of 26 OECD countries panel data from 2000 to 2007. Following Png and Wang (2006), the production equation of recorded music is developed. Meanwhile, the author introduces other independent variables such as per capita GDP, employment rate and R&D, population and economic openness. The econometric methods consist of two way fixed effects method, Arellano-Bond dynamic panel-data estimation and dynamic panel-data estimation, one-step difference GMM (generalized method of moments) by use of Stata 10.0. The findings are as followings: Intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection exerts positive effect on recorded music sales, and the influencing coefficient is at the range of 0.815 to 0.915. Meanwhile, economic openness also has positive influence. The studying results suggest that IPRs protection can reinforce the sale of recorded music, and it is very urgent to enhance IPRs protection.

PurposeThis paper aims to investigate whether a complementary effect exists between government R&D subsidies (GRSs) and intellectual property rights (IPR) protection on innovation performance in the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in China. This paper also attempts to understand whether this complementary effect is significantly different across China’s eastern, central and western regions.Design/methodology/approachThe study sample comprised 28 provinces involved in the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in China from 2003 to 2014. Ordinary least squares was used to test the complementary effects of GRSs and IPR protection on innovation performance. The seemingly unrelated estimation test was also applied to ascertain whether differences existed between the eastern and western regions.FindingsA complementary effect between GRSs and IPR protection in terms of improving the innovation of pharmaceutical manufacturers was found to exist only in eastern and western regions. There was no significant difference in the complementary effect between GRSs and IPR protection in terms of improving innovation among the three regions. Without considering the interaction effect of GRSs and IPR protection, the GRSs were negatively associated with innovation in the eastern region, but positively related to the innovation in central region.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature on government policies and innovation by incorporating the interaction effect of GRSs and IPR protection on innovation in the context of a high-tech industry (pharmaceutical manufacturing) in an emerging economy (China). It also explores the internal differences in the influence of this complementary effect on innovation in an emerging economy, enriching the institution-based view.

Despite a growing literature, the relationship between financing constraints (FC), intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and firm innovation remains unclear within the transitional country context. Drawing on endogenous growth theory and extending the Gorodnichenko and Schnitzer (2013) framework, we hypothesize that in addition to firm-specific factors, country-level variables manifested within FC hamper incremental innovation, albeit in varying degrees due to industry heterogeneity. Secondly, as opposed to previous studies that solely focus on FC affecting firm innovation, we propose that due to resource constraints, firms in transition economies tend to follow an imitational innovation strategy, and therefore, from this perspective, IPR protection can be crucial for firm-level innovation within those economies. Using data from the World Bank Enterprise Survey (WBES) consisting of information for about 21,960 firms from 27 Eastern European and Central Asian transition countries and employing a two-step probit model with endogenous regressors, we find that adverse effects of FC and IPR on firms' innovation activities are driven from within as well as between industries. Focusing on the differential impacts of FC and IPR protection across industries, we direct potential causal pathways from easing FC and optimal IPR protection to encourage firms' innovation. Based on the findings, while very strict IPR protection is detrimental to firms' product and process innovation in industries with limited resource and skill capabilities, it is nevertheless helpful for research and development (R&D) activities in industries characterised by strong R&D and IP capacities. Our results offer useful insights for policymakers to support incremental innovation as well as boost invention. IPR protection policies require to be customised to the industries and firms, since invariably tight or lax IPR enforcement can be discouraging to both incremental and radical innovation, causing all industries suffering from the same treatment.

The article draws attention to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights in Ukraine by civil and special legislation, the rules of which are designed to protect the subjective rights of right holders and other participants in legal relations in the field of intellectual property. Some aspects of the legal nature of jurisdictional remedies are studied. Attention is paid to the specifics of protection of intellectual property rights by civil law, which consists primarily in the methods of protection provided by procedural law. The legislation, the norms of which guarantee the protection of intellectual property and the ways of protection of civil rights are outlined. The existing in the legal literature different views on the classification of methods of protection of property rights are analyzed. The legal analysis of the application of the vindication claim as a means of protection of intellectual property rights is carried out and the given proposals are formulated..

Intellectual property rights protection and unemployment in a North South model: A theoretical analysis

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) always drive invention and creativeness. It also creates new employment and makes you more competitive. Intellectual property rights protect and benefit the work of writers, artists, designers, discoverers, and other IPR users while they are being used by others. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) help protect ideas and creative works developed by inventors, designers, developers, and writers. After all, protecting intellectual property is one of the major challenges for both developed and developing nations. There are numerous international laws that protect intellectual property. International law employs several guidelines and recommendations to confirm the protection of intellectual property. In addition, most countries have intellectual property laws. Maximum countries have their own legislative powers to protect their intellectual property rights. But if not done properly, all these international and domestic intellectual property laws will be valueless. The legal system that China and Pakistan follow to protect their intellectual property is very similar to the legal system of developed countries but also has some main variances. This research paper attempts to examine the assessment of IPR protection in China and Pakistan. This research paper also describes IPR protection procedures in China and Pakistan. In addition, this article initiates a comparison of international IPR indexes to demonstrate and describe the variances in IPR protection assessments. This article also lists and describes the various factors that influence the lack of proper protection of property and intellectual property rights in both countries.

Since the early 1990s, there has been a growing interest in the potential contribution of intellectual property rights (IPR) protection to global trade and investment. However, there is an ongoing debate among analysts regarding the extent to which stronger IPR actually stimulate international transactions via transfer of technology. This paper addresses this issue by evaluating how foreign intellectual property rights (IPR) protection affects how U.S. firms serve overseas markets through exports and foreign direct investment (FDI). Using panel data from 53 countries over 1994-2006, the empirical analysis was based on a dynamic system GMM modeling framework. The empirical results suggest that IPR has a weak negative effect on U.S. exports, but a statistically significant positive effect on U.S. FDI. In addition, the results also indicated that less US exports flow to countries with weak imitative ability after they strengthen IPR protection.

This paper presents a dynamic general equilibrium model with two structurally identical open economies. Trade liberalization promotes innovation and growth when intellectual property rights (IPR) protection is sufficiently weak. Trade on the other hand does not affect innovation and growth when IPR protection is strong. We show that this result holds for both horizontal and vertical endogenous growth models, which have so far had contradictory predictions on how trade affects innovation. The reason for this supposed contradiction are implicit IPR protection assumptions in the two different types of growth models, strong protection in the horizontal model and weak protection in the vertical model. The IPR protection assumption makes a big difference for the size of the gains from trade. In a simple numerical example we show that assuming weak IPR protection can imply more than five times higher overall gains from trade. We also build a North–South model and add another aspect of IPR protection influencing the duration of Northern patents, namely imitation in the South. In the asymmetric model with a competitive fringe in the South, IPR protection no longer plays a crucial role for the dynamic gains from trade.

Research on the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and economic growth and innovation has been often explored. However, there is an absence of research dealing with the the relationship between IPR protection and the international competitiveness of high-tech industry, especially pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. This study aims to examine the impact of the strength of IPR protection on the international competitiveness of China’s pharmaceutical manufacturing industry, by using time series data from 1995 to 2014. Modified Ginarte-Park (GP) index is used to measure the strength of IPR protection and revealed comparative advantage (RCA) index is utilized to measure the international competitiveness of China's pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. Multivariate time series model and OLS estimation are employed to examine the relationship between IPR protection and RCA index. The result shows that strict IPR protection does not enhance the international competitiveness of China’s pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. The finding suggests that it is more appropriate to adopt a more relaxed IPR protection system for pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in China. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.29.1.16878

Based on Chinese industrial enterprises data and Chinese customs data from 2000 to 2013, the paper examines the micromechanism of intellectual property rights protection affecting the quality upgrade of firms’ export products. The empirical results show that strengthening intellectual property right (IPR) protection has a specific and significant role in promoting the quality upgrade of firms’ export products; the estimation results are still robust after using instrumental variables to overcome endogenous biases. Heterogeneity analyze results show that IPR protection has a relatively more significant effect on the quality improvement of export products for foreign‐funded firms, high‐tech industry firms, firms that import intermediate goods from OECD countries, and firms that import high‐tech intermediate goods. Further analysis finds that IPR protection promotes quality upgrade of firms’ export products through the intermediate goods quality effect, product category effect, and technology spillover effect; the expansion of the scale of imported intermediate products brought about by the strengthening of IPR protection has produced a “substitution effect” on the production capacity and R&D capabilities of Chinese upstream industries, and when expanding production capacity, it is necessary to strengthen technology research and development capabilities of the upstream intermediate product industry and improve the quality and technology of intermediate products so as to alleviate the negative impact of the expansion of foreign intermediate product imports and supply. Strengthening IPR protection will further enhance the “Washington apple effect” of the import of intermediate goods, and special attention should be paid to import partners with the long‐distance and high‐quality intermediates in the formulation and implementation of trade policies. The study is helpful for policymakers to formulate correct and effective IPR protection policies and foreign trade policies and also provides empirical evidence and useful inspiration for improving Chinese enterprises’ innovation level and promoting the upgrading of intermediate products production under the current IPR protection strategy.

The relevance of the study lies in the fact that the article focuses on the analysis of the Appeals Chamber of the National Intellectual Property Authority's activities within the mechanism of protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights. The author draws attention to the fact that the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA are carried out at various stages and sub-stages of the mechanism for protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights. In the work, taking into account the theoretical and methodological components, attention is drawn to the fact that the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights has its own components that define different groups of legal relations in which the Appeals Chamber of the NIPAparticipates. The purpose of the article is to outline the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA through the prism of the components of the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, taking into account scientific achievements and regulatory acts. In terms of methodology, the article is based on an analysis of foreign doctrine, national views, and legislation covering the doctrine of the mechanism for the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. The research is based on the following general and specific methods of scientific and legal cognition: formal-logical, generalisation, linguistic analysis, and comparative law. The methods presented make it possible to objectively and comprehensively outline the main features of the activities of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights, the functioning of the Appeals Chamber of the NIPA cannot be considered in terms of the differentiation of two components: the component of preventive protection of intellectual property rights and the component of defence of intellectual property rights. This is due to the existence of stages in the mechanism for protecting and defending intellectual property rights, within which the protection and defence of intellectual property rights are implemented dynamically. This indicates the promise of further research on this topic.