Intellectual property laws are intended to promote innovation, but some economists, such as Milton Friedman, have argued that such laws are not desirable. In the United States, there is no intellectual property protection for food recipes or for fashion designs. Considering the state of these two industries, and bearing in mind the discussion of the inefficiency of monoplies, can you think of any reasons why intellectual property laws might hinder innovation in some cases?

Question

Guest

Business

13 September, 08:17

Intellectual property laws are intended to promote innovation, but some economists, such as Milton Friedman, have argued that such laws are not desirable. In the United States, there is no intellectual property protection for food recipes or for fashion designs. Considering the state of these two industries, and bearing in mind the discussion of the inefficiency of monoplies, can you think of any reasons why intellectual property laws might hinder innovation in some cases?

+1

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Higgins · Answer 1

Tweaks to Intellectual Property

Explanation:

What is Intellectual Property?

Under the Intellectual property Act, the intellectual property is the knowledge of anything that is first attained by the firm or an individual person and as because they only have the particular knowledge which can be used to earn money, the regulation hence gives the ownership right of the property to the innovator because he has spent time and cost to acquire this knowledge.

Why Intellectual Property Act is Good for innovation and how it can hinder innovation?

If this act wasn't present then not even a single company would like to incur heavy costs of research and development which will postpone the solutions of many problems the society has to tackle yet. So absence of law would probably hinder the innovation but the question is how the presence of law can hinder innovation?

The small improvements in the innovation and small increase of innovation in the product which is patented or under the protection of Intellectual Property Act would probably result in stealing of the technology. So this means that the presence of intellectual property act will also hinder the innovation. Just take the example of Pepsi or Coke, they didn't have patented their product because of the tweak to innovation and till today have kept its product secret to earn huge profits.

The issue is that the food recipes and fashion designs are not protected in United States because minor changes to their intellectual property will let the rival exploit the market by using the competitor's products. So these properties must be protected by keeping the recipe secret.