Intellectual Property Law & Competition Law

• Author: Atul Patel, Auro Aurobinda Panda, Akshay Deo, Siddhartha Khettry, Sujith Philip Mathew
• Position: Kiit law School, Kiit University, India
• Pages: 120-130

JICLT

Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology

Vol. 6, Issue 2 (2011)

120

Intellectual Property Law & Competition Law

Atul Patel, Aurobinda Panda, Akshay Deo,

Siddhartha Khettry and Sujith Philip Mathew

Kiit law School, Kiit University, India,

aurobindapanda2003@gmail.com,

Abstract. Competition law an d intellectual property rights (IPRs) have evolved historicall y

as two separate systems of law. There is a considerable overlap in the goals of the two systems of

law because both are aimed at promoting innovation and economic growth.

Yet there are also

potential conflicts owing to the means used by each system to promote those goals. IP laws

generally offer a right of exclusive use and exploitation to pr ovide a reward to the innovator, to

provide an ince ntive to other innovators and to bring into the public domain innovative

information that might otherwise remain trade secrets. Competition authorities regulate near

monopolies, mergers and commercial agreements with the aim of maintaining effective

competition in markets. This article introduces the concept of IPRs and Competition law. It

highlights important areas of conflict between the two laws a nd also deals with the Indian antitrust

law. It concludes by trying to harmonize the conflicts.

1. Introduction

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and Competition Law are both founded with the purpose of achieving

economic development, technological advancement and consumer welfare. IPR are legal rights governing the

use of such creations. This term covers a bundle of rights, such as patents, trademarks or copyrights, ea ch

different in scope a nd duration with a d ifferent purpose and effect.

1

Co mpetition la w seeks to prevent cer tain

behaviour that may restrict competition to detriment consumer welfare. In short run, IPR encourages innovation

and new products in the market, whereas in long run- Competition Law promotes consumer welfare by

introducing new products to the market and maintaining the qualities of the goods in the market. T hus both are

complementary means of promoting innovation, technical progress and economic growth to the benefit of

consumers and the whole economy.

IPRs and competition are normally regarded as areas with conflicting objectives. The reason is that IPRs, b y

designating boundaries within which competitors may exercise monopolies o ver their innovation, appear to be

against the principles of competitive market and level playing fields sought by competition rules, in particular

the restrictions on horizontal and vertical restraints, or on the abuse o f dominant positions.

IP Laws are monopolistic in nature. They guarantee a n exclusive right to the creators and owners of work

which are a result of human i ntellectual creativity. Also they prevent commercial exploitation of the i nnovation

by others. This legal monopoly may, depending on the unavailab ility of substitutes in the relevant market, lead to

market power and even monopoly as defined under co mpetition law. It is an advantage granted to the owner over

the rest of the industry or sector. When this advantage or dominant position i s abused, it creates a conflict

between IPR and competition law.

2

1

Jayashree Watal, Intellectual Property Rights in WTO and Developing Countries, 2001 (Oxford University Press) , at 1-5

2

Adv. Vishnu S, Conflict Between Competition Law And Intellectual Property Rights (August 13, 2010)

http://www.articlesbase.com/intellectual-property-articles/conflict-between-competition-law-and-intellectual-property-rights-

3106578.html#ixzz0yxtT0wdR