Re: Re: Re: too many re:'s
I am not making a big deal of IP. The thread started with competition and concentration (I don't see it as monopoly (this is at the level of exchange)) and my take on it was dialectical. The issue was if there was greater "monopoly" today. The answer is it depends, there is considerable variation by sectors, since there is a dialectical relationship between the two, competition leading to monopoly and monopoly leading to competition. IP is beefed precisely because of the threat of competition. What the actual situation is today will have to be empirically verified. Besides, concentration ratios (Herfindahl index if you will) do show fair amount of concentration by sectors at the global level. Nationally they may have different ratios. Now whether IP raises the profit rate is another issue. Given what you said (I think) about the weakness of labor, the profit rate is likely to be higher with IP because of the monopoly rents (however temporary) that arise with innovation. Cheers, Anthony xxx Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor Comparative International Development University of WashingtonTaylor Institute & South Asia Program 1900 Commerce StreetJackson School of International Studies Tacoma, WA 98402, USA University of Washington, Seattle Phone: (253) 692-4462 Fax : (253) 692-5612 xxx On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Doug Henwood wrote: > Anthony D'Costa wrote: > > >Some empirical intuition. Example: Texas Instruments in Bangalore India > >designed a digital signal process (DSP) chip for use as a controller for > >Seagate hard disk drives. TI Dallas (a profit center) has the IP on it, > >making millions of dollars, not TI Bangalore (a cost center). Seagate has > >its own IP, which virtually all PC owners ultimately pay for. > > IP is all very nice, but TI probably sells this chip because it's > good, but in 6 or 12 months someone else could be making a better > one. It's just capitalist innovation with lawyers thrown in. I think > you & Michael are making way too much out of this. One reason capital > is so hot on IP is that it's so cheap to replicate a lot of this > stuff, and it's impossible even for lawyers to suppress that. > > Doug > >
Re: too many re:'s
I was answering the question of how it could happen; not that it would necessarily happen. Doug Henwood wrote: > Anthony D'Costa wrote: > > >In the aggregate, Capitalists A and B can increase profits (as a share of > >total costs?) because of IP. It's not A ripping B but both A and B > >ripping everybody else. > > How do you know this? > > Doug -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: too many re:'s
Anthony D'Costa wrote: >Some empirical intuition. Example: Texas Instruments in Bangalore India >designed a digital signal process (DSP) chip for use as a controller for >Seagate hard disk drives. TI Dallas (a profit center) has the IP on it, >making millions of dollars, not TI Bangalore (a cost center). Seagate has >its own IP, which virtually all PC owners ultimately pay for. IP is all very nice, but TI probably sells this chip because it's good, but in 6 or 12 months someone else could be making a better one. It's just capitalist innovation with lawyers thrown in. I think you & Michael are making way too much out of this. One reason capital is so hot on IP is that it's so cheap to replicate a lot of this stuff, and it's impossible even for lawyers to suppress that. Doug
Re: too many re:'s
Some empirical intuition. Example: Texas Instruments in Bangalore India designed a digital signal process (DSP) chip for use as a controller for Seagate hard disk drives. TI Dallas (a profit center) has the IP on it, making millions of dollars, not TI Bangalore (a cost center). Seagate has its own IP, which virtually all PC owners ultimately pay for. But one must remember that IP for a particular capitalist is particular. Capitalist competition in the way it plays out certainly undermines IP in that alternative processes are developed, etc. xxx Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor Comparative International Development University of WashingtonTaylor Institute & South Asia Program 1900 Commerce StreetJackson School of International Studies Tacoma, WA 98402, USA University of Washington, Seattle Phone: (253) 692-4462 Fax : (253) 692-5612 xxx On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Doug Henwood wrote: > Anthony D'Costa wrote: > > >In the aggregate, Capitalists A and B can increase profits (as a share of > >total costs?) because of IP. It's not A ripping B but both A and B > >ripping everybody else. > > How do you know this? > > Doug > >
too many re:'s
Anthony D'Costa wrote: >In the aggregate, Capitalists A and B can increase profits (as a share of >total costs?) because of IP. It's not A ripping B but both A and B >ripping everybody else. How do you know this? Doug
