Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1603955
 
 

References (33)



 
 

Citations (2)



 


 



When is Static Analysis a Sufficient Proxy for Dynamic Considerations? Reconsidering Antitrust and Innovation


Joshua S. Gans


University of Toronto - Rotman School of Management; NBER

April 29, 2010


Abstract:     
This paper examines the claim that dynamic considerations play a particularly important role in certain industries (in particular, those characterized by high rates of product innovation) and, consequently, render antitrust analysis based on static concepts inappropriate or misleading. By expositing and applying the fully dynamic model of Segal and Whinston (2007), I argue that, in many cases, static analyses are not misleading and that dynamic considerations (such as competition for the market) are not decisive in these analyses. I argue, however, that dynamic considerations can be important when the predominant mode of commercialization by innovative entrants is via cooperation rather than competition with incumbent firms; examples of cooperation include acquisition and licensing. Therefore, this means that static measure of competition are likely to be reinforced in certain circumstances by related dynamic considerations.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 33

Keywords: innovation, antitrust, exclusion, tying, licensing

JEL Classification: K21, L40

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 14, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Gans, Joshua S., When is Static Analysis a Sufficient Proxy for Dynamic Considerations? Reconsidering Antitrust and Innovation (April 29, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1603955 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1603955

Contact Information

Joshua S. Gans (Contact Author)
University of Toronto - Rotman School of Management ( email )
Canada
HOME PAGE: http://www.joshuagans.com

NBER ( email )
1050 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,382
Downloads: 182
Download Rank: 95,043
References:  33
Citations:  2
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.484 seconds