欧盟微软案中的激励平衡测试:一种更“基于经济学”的方法?

S. Vezzoso
{"title":"欧盟微软案中的激励平衡测试:一种更“基于经济学”的方法?","authors":"S. Vezzoso","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1358924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Microsoft's claim that it had an objective justification for its refusal to supply interoperability information covered by intellectual property rights was dismissed by the EU Commission. To substantiate this, the Commission applied a newly framed incentives balance test and concluded that the need to protect Microsoft's incentives to innovate, under the specific circumstances of the case, could not objectively justify the undertaking's refusal to license. On the contrary, Microsoft's incentives to innovate were most likely to increase if it were required to license its interoperability information to competitors. This new balancing test is very controversial, both from the economic and legal perspective. It can also be questioned whether the balancing test to justification has been correctly applied in the case at issue. However, the paper purports to show that, for future discussion under the expected policy debate on a more \"economics-based\" approach to Article 82 of the EU Treaty, valuable insights can be gained from a careful scrutiny of the incentives balance test. In particular, the test helps realizing that a dynamic competition approach on the abuse of dominant position should devote considerable efforts to better understand the working of innovation processes at different industry layers. Moreover, that at least equally challenging is the identification of the appropriate competition remedies in industries characterized by, on the one side, Schumpeterian modes of innovation, and, on the other, strenuous stasis forces like network effects.","PeriodicalId":281709,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property Law eJournal","volume":"464 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Incentives Balance Test in the EU Microsoft Case: A More 'Economics-Based' Approach?\",\"authors\":\"S. Vezzoso\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1358924\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Microsoft's claim that it had an objective justification for its refusal to supply interoperability information covered by intellectual property rights was dismissed by the EU Commission. To substantiate this, the Commission applied a newly framed incentives balance test and concluded that the need to protect Microsoft's incentives to innovate, under the specific circumstances of the case, could not objectively justify the undertaking's refusal to license. On the contrary, Microsoft's incentives to innovate were most likely to increase if it were required to license its interoperability information to competitors. This new balancing test is very controversial, both from the economic and legal perspective. It can also be questioned whether the balancing test to justification has been correctly applied in the case at issue. However, the paper purports to show that, for future discussion under the expected policy debate on a more \\\"economics-based\\\" approach to Article 82 of the EU Treaty, valuable insights can be gained from a careful scrutiny of the incentives balance test. In particular, the test helps realizing that a dynamic competition approach on the abuse of dominant position should devote considerable efforts to better understand the working of innovation processes at different industry layers. Moreover, that at least equally challenging is the identification of the appropriate competition remedies in industries characterized by, on the one side, Schumpeterian modes of innovation, and, on the other, strenuous stasis forces like network effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":281709,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intellectual Property Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"464 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intellectual Property Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1358924\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intellectual Property Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1358924","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

微软声称,它有客观理由拒绝提供知识产权范围内的互操作性信息,但欧盟委员会驳回了这一说法。为了证实这一点,欧盟委员会采用了一项新制定的激励平衡测试,并得出结论认为,在本案的具体情况下,保护微软创新激励的必要性不能客观地证明该企业拒绝许可的合理性。相反,如果微软被要求将其互操作性信息授权给竞争对手,那么它的创新动机很可能会增加。从经济和法律的角度来看,这一新的平衡检验都非常有争议。对正当理由的平衡检验是否正确适用于本案也可以提出质疑。然而,本文旨在表明,在预期的政策辩论下,对欧盟条约第82条采取更“以经济为基础”的方法的未来讨论,可以从对激励平衡测试的仔细审查中获得有价值的见解。特别是,该测试有助于认识到,对滥用支配地位的动态竞争方法应该投入大量精力来更好地理解不同行业层面的创新过程的运作。此外,至少同样具有挑战性的是,在以熊彼特创新模式为特征的行业中,确定适当的竞争补救措施,而另一方面,则是像网络效应这样的剧烈停滞力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Incentives Balance Test in the EU Microsoft Case: A More 'Economics-Based' Approach?
Microsoft's claim that it had an objective justification for its refusal to supply interoperability information covered by intellectual property rights was dismissed by the EU Commission. To substantiate this, the Commission applied a newly framed incentives balance test and concluded that the need to protect Microsoft's incentives to innovate, under the specific circumstances of the case, could not objectively justify the undertaking's refusal to license. On the contrary, Microsoft's incentives to innovate were most likely to increase if it were required to license its interoperability information to competitors. This new balancing test is very controversial, both from the economic and legal perspective. It can also be questioned whether the balancing test to justification has been correctly applied in the case at issue. However, the paper purports to show that, for future discussion under the expected policy debate on a more "economics-based" approach to Article 82 of the EU Treaty, valuable insights can be gained from a careful scrutiny of the incentives balance test. In particular, the test helps realizing that a dynamic competition approach on the abuse of dominant position should devote considerable efforts to better understand the working of innovation processes at different industry layers. Moreover, that at least equally challenging is the identification of the appropriate competition remedies in industries characterized by, on the one side, Schumpeterian modes of innovation, and, on the other, strenuous stasis forces like network effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信