An institution-based view of IPR protection

Imagine some difficult intellectual property rights (IPR) negotiations between a superpower and an emerging economy. Negotiators from the superpower demanded that its IPR be respected. Their counterparts from the emerging economy shrugged: ''Well, we are still a developing country, but we need to promote education and facilitate learning.'' In other words, IPR piracy had to go on in the emerging economy–—never mind the protests from the superpower. Which two countries are involved? If you think this scenario describes the challenging negotiations between the United States and China recently, you would only be given partial credit in my class. This scenario also describes the tough negotiations between Great Britain (the superpower at that time) and the United States (the emerging economy of the day) in most of the 19 th century. Between the founding of the United States and 1891 when the Chace Act was passed, pirating British publications was the widely accepted norm for American book publishers, newspapers, and magazines. There was no shortage of frustrated British authors (such as Charles Dickens) and officials who sought to change Americans' behavior–—and then became more frustrated by Americans' lack of willingness to honor and protect IPR (Tomalin, 2011). In today's discussion about IPR, few have bothered to draw lessons from the earlier history of IPR Abstract There is a great deal of frustration regarding the lack of progress on intellectual property rights (IPR) protection in China. This article leverages the historical episode in most of the 19 th century during which the United States was the leading IPR violator. Great Britain as the superpower of the time sought but failed to convince the United States to improve IPR protection. Advancing an institution-based view of IPR protection, I argue that both the U.S. refusal to protect foreign IPR in the 19 th century and the current Chinese lack of enthusiasm to meet U.S. demands on IPR protection are rational. However, if history is any guide, the future outlook is not depressing. In 1891, the United States voluntarily agreed to protect the IPR of foreign works, because the U.S. economy became sufficiently developed and U.S. IPR started to be pirated elsewhere. Drawing lessons from this episode of history, I predict that IPR protection will significantly improve when Chinese IPR are widely pirated by foreign violators outside of China.