Last updated 
The (uneasy and somewhat messy) interaction of the IP laws and the competition laws
Intellectual property rights ('IPRs'), Professor Cornish reminds us, 'are essentially negative: they are rights to stop others doing certain things'1 – those things being primarily the use of the ideas (or more properly, the output of creative endeavour, which may be the expression or material embodiment of an idea, rather than the idea itself) covered in the grant made to right-owner. As rights to exclude, IPRs sit uneasily with the conventional notion of competition, which centres on the ability of several, possibly many, parties to act as rivals in striving for economic rewards. The uneasy nature of the relationship should not suggest that there is contradiction between IPR’s and competition: rather, it is a truism that IPRs, by allowing creators to secure a greater share of the social gain from their creation than they would otherwise, can promote investment in creative effort; and that it is this investment that underpins the development of new processes and products which not only contributes directly to increased wellbeing but also, in Schumpeter’s famous phrase, is a form of competition 'as much more effective than [conventional price competition] as a bombardment is in comparison with forcing a door'.... more. (pdf, size 57kb)