失去领先地位：为什么美国必须重新确立其作为强大知识产权全球冠军的地位（英）

itif.org Losing the Lead: Why the United States Must Reassert Itself as a Global Champion for Robust IP Rights STEPHEN EZELL | JUNE 2023 Arguments for weakening IP rights have been gaining traction in the United States to enable a redistribution agenda. But spurring U.S. competitiveness, supporting American jobs, and advancing innovation will require the federal government to step up its game in defense of a more robust global IP regime. KEY TAKEAWAYS  The U.S. government has long supported robust IP policies, but an increasing number of policymakers have succumbed to the progressive economic narrative that IP only benefits big firms while harming workers and consumers, at home and abroad.  Without IP protection, revenues decline, leading entrepreneurs to reduce their investments in new innovation and content because there is a greater risk they won’t be able to recoup their capital costs.  “Alternatives” to IP, such as patronage and reward systems, cannot adequately sustain America’s IP-intensive industries and the more than 45 million workers they employ.  To reengage internationally, U.S. policymakers should oppose IP waivers, include IP in trade agreement negotiations, take measures to address China’s IP threat, and lead international discussions around emerging technologies and IP.  To strengthen domestic policies, U.S. policymakers should adopt website blocking legislation and certain royalty rights, improve public engagement and education about IP, and stop trying to weaken the Bayh-Dole Act to reduce drug prices. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION FOUNDATION | JUNE 2023 PAGE 2 CONTENTS Key Takeaways ................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3 America’s Long Tradition of Supporting Robust IP Rights ....................................................... 4 The New Anti-IP Progressive Orthodoxy ................................................................................ 5 Claim 1: Information Should Be Free ................................................................................ 5 Claim 2: IP Doesn’t Help Small Business .......................................................................... 6 Claim 3: IP Harms Consumers .......................................................................................... 7 Claim 4: IP Does Not Benefit the US. Economy ................................................................. 8 Claim 5: Weak IP Overseas Helps the U.S. Economy ........................................................ 10 Claims 6–9: Dependency Theory at Work ......................................................................... 11 Claim 6: IP Harms Developing Nations ........................................................................ 11 Claim 7: IP Makes It Harder for Developing Nations to Ac