Abstract
Standardization of trade secrets protection was one of the goals of the TRIPs Agreement of 1998. Still, substantial differences across jurisdictions remain. In defining the optimal scope of trade secrets law, lawmakers should consider that strong protection is likely to promote inventiveness but also to retard the diffusion of knowledge and stymie competition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Allen RC (1983) Collective invention. J Econ Behav Organ 4(1):1–24
Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why US manufacturing firms patent (or not) (No. w7552), National Bureau of Economic Research
De Vrey R (2006) Towards a European unfair competition law: a clash between legal families. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden
Denicolò V, Franzoni LA (2012) Weak intellectual property rights, research spillovers, and the incentive to innovate. Am Law Econ Rev 14(1):111–140
Epstein SR (1998) Craft guilds, apprenticeship, and technological change in preindustrial Europe. J Econ Hist 58(03):684–713
European Commission (2013) Study on trade secrets and confidential business information in the internal market. Downloadable at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/trade_secrets/
Fosfuri A, Rønde T (2004) High-tech clusters, technology spillovers, and trade secret laws. Int J Ind Organ 22(1):45–65
Gilson RJ (1999) Legal infrastructure of high technology industrial districts: Silicon Valley, route 128, and covenants not to compete. NY Univ Law Rev 74(3):575–629
Hall B, Helmers C, Rogers M, Sena V (2013) The importance (or not) of patents to UK firms. Oxf Econ Pap 65(3):603–629
Hall B, Helmers C, Rogers M, Sena V (2014) The choice between formal and informal intellectual property: a review. J Econ Lit 52(2):375–423
Henning-Bodewig F (ed) (2013) International handbook of unfair competition. Beck, Hart, Oxford and Nomos, Baden Baden
Landes W, Posner R (2003) The economic structure of intellectual property law. Harvard Universtiy Press, Harvard
Lemley MA (2011) The surprising virtues of treating trade secrets as IP rights. In: Dreyfuss R, Strandburg K (eds) The law and theory of trade secrecy: a handbook of contemporary research. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Rønde T (2001) Trade secrets and information sharing. J Econ Manag Strateg 10(3):391–417
Saxenian A (1996) Regional advantage: culture and competition in Silicon Valley and route 128. Harvard University Press, Harvard
Von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2011) Open innovation and the private-collective model for innovation incentives. In: Dreyfuss R, Strandburg K (eds) The law and theory of trade secrecy: a handbook of contemporary research. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Franzoni, L.A. (2019). Trade Secrets Law. In: Marciano, A., Ramello, G.B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_564
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_564
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7752-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7753-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences