IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/whu/wpaper/08-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An economic analysis of tradesecret protection in buyer-seller relationships

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Höffler
  • Stefan Bechthold

Abstract

The economic analysis of trade-secret protection has traditionally focused on the interests of companies to conceal information from competitors in order to gain a competitive advantage through trade-secret law. This has neglected cases in which the interest is not in concealing information from competitors, but from trading partners. We investigate the social efficiency effects of trade-secret protection in such cases. Many results from economic theory state that asymmetric information (and therefore also its legal protection) is socially undesirable since it leads to inefficient trade. At the same time, protecting private information might create incentives for socially desirable investments. We model this trade-off in a simple buyer-seller model and find that, indeed, trade-secret protection has ambiguous welfare effects. However, a simple, informationally undemanding rule, conditioning the applicability of legal protection on a minimum investment by the informed party to conceal the information, helps to apply trade-secret protection only when it increases welfare. This rationalizes important features of current legal practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Höffler & Stefan Bechthold, 2008. "An economic analysis of tradesecret protection in buyer-seller relationships," WHU Working Paper Series - Economics Group 08-04, WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:whu:wpaper:08-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hbz:992-opus4-5166
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Bagnoli & Ted Bergstrom, 2006. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Rosa L. Matzkin & Daniel L. McFadden & James C. Moore & Nicholas C. Yann (ed.), Rationality and Equilibrium, pages 217-241, Springer.
    2. Claudia M. Landeo & Maxim Nikitin, 2006. "Split-Award Tort Reform, Firm's Level of Care, and Litigation Outcomes," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 162(4), pages 571-600, December.
    3. David D. Friedman & William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, 1991. "Some Economics of Trade Secret Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 61-72, Winter.
    4. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    5. Levin, Jonathan, 2001. "Information and the Market for Lemons," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 657-666, Winter.
    6. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Yeon-Koo Che, 1991. "Decoupling Liability: Optimal Incentives for Care and Litigation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 562-570, Winter.
    7. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1971. "The Private and Social Value of Information and the Reward to Inventive Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 561-574, September.
    8. Albert Choi & Chris William Sanchirico, 2004. "Should Plaintiffs Win What Defendants Lose? Litigation Stakes, Litigation Effort, and the Benefits of Decoupling," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 323-354, June.
    9. Steven Shavell, 1994. "Acquisition and Disclosure of Information Prior to Sale," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 20-36, Spring.
    10. Stigler, George J., 1980. "An Introduction to Privacy in Economics and Politics," Working Papers 10, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florian Hoffmann & Roman Inderst & Marco Ottaviani, 2020. "Persuasion Through Selective Disclosure: Implications for Marketing, Campaigning, and Privacy Regulation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4958-4979, November.
    2. Chopard, Bertrand & Cortade, Thomas & Langlais, Eric, 2010. "Trial and settlement negotiations between asymmetrically skilled parties," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 18-27, March.
    3. Nuno Garoupa & Chris William Sanchirico, 2010. "Decoupling as Transactions Tax," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(2), pages 469-496.
    4. Benjamin Hermalin & Michael Katz, 2006. "Privacy, property rights and efficiency: The economics of privacy as secrecy," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 209-239, September.
    5. Florian Hoffmann & Roman Inderst & Marco Ottaviani, 2013. "Hypertargeting, Limited Attention, and Privacy: Implications for Marketing and Campaigning," Working Papers 479, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    6. Landeo, Claudia M. & Nikitin, Maxim & Babcock, Linda, 2007. "Split-awards and disputes: An experimental study of a strategic model of litigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 553-572, July.
    7. Jeremy Bertomeu & Igor Vaysman & Wenjie Xue, 2021. "Voluntary versus mandatory disclosure," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 658-692, June.
    8. Goerke, Laszlo & Neugart, Michael, 2015. "Lobbying and dismissal dispute resolution systems," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 50-62.
    9. David Moroz, 2005. "Production of Scientific Knowledge and Radical Uncertainty: The Limits of the Normative Approach in Innovation Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, November.
    10. Ikeda Yasuhiro & Mori Daisuke, 2015. "Can Decoupling Punitive Damages Deter an Injurer’s Harmful Activity?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 513-528, November.
    11. Garcia, Daniel & Tsur, Matan, 2021. "Information design in competitive insurance markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    12. Daniel Garcia & Roee Teper & Matan Tsur, 2018. "Information Design in Insurance Markets: Selling Peaches in a Market for Lemons," CESifo Working Paper Series 6853, CESifo.
    13. Rodrigo Montes & Wilfried Sand-Zantman & Tommaso Valletti, 2015. "The Value of Personal Information in Markets with Endogenous Privacy," CEIS Research Paper 352, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 05 Aug 2015.
    14. William P. Barnett & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2017. "Special Issue Introduction: Evolutionary Logics of Strategy and Organization," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-1, March.
    15. Vincent Glode & Richard C. Green & Richard Lowery, 2012. "Financial Expertise as an Arms Race," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(5), pages 1723-1759, October.
    16. Monnet, Cyril & Quintin, Erwan, 2017. "Limited disclosure and hidden orders in asset markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 602-616.
    17. Alexandre Gaudeul, 2004. "Shareware competition: Selling an experience," Game Theory and Information 0409008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Martimort, David, 2019. ""When Olson Meets Dahl": From Inefficient Groups Formation to Inefficient Policy-Making," CEPR Discussion Papers 13843, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Alessandro De Chiara & Juan-José Ganuza & Fernando Gómez & Ester Manna & Adrián Segura, 2023. "Platform Liability with Reputational Sanctions," Working Papers 1403, Barcelona School of Economics.
    20. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2019. "Information Design: A Unified Perspective," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(1), pages 44-95, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    disclosure of information; hold-up problems; trade secrets;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:whu:wpaper:08-04. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Rainer Michael Rilke (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/whukode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.