Damages

About: Damages is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 9365 publications have been published within this topic receiving 89750 citations. The topic is also known as: compensation award.

Damages and injunctions in protecting intellectual property

Abstract: We investigate how liability rules and property rules protect intellectual property. Infringement might not be deterred under any of the enforcement regimes available. However, counterintuitively, a credible threat of infringement can actually benefit the patentholder. We compare the two doctrines of damages, lost profit (lost royalty) and unjust enrichment, and argue that unjust enrichment protects the patentholder better than lost royalty in the case of proprietary research tools. Both can be superior to a property rule, depending on how much delay is permitted before infringement is enjoined. For other proprietary products (end-user products, cost-reducing innovations), these conclusions can be reversed.

Impacts of 1997-98 El Niño Generated Weather in the United States.

Abstract: This paper assesses the major impacts on human lives and the economy of the United States resulting from weather events attributed to El Nino 1997-98. Southern states and California were plagued by storms, whereas the northern half of the nation experienced much above normal cold season temperatures and below normal precipitation and snowfall. Losses included 189 lives, many due to tornadoes, and the major economic losses were property and crop damages from storms, loss of business by the recreation industry and by snow removal equipment/supplies manufacturers and sales firms, and government relief costs. Benefits included an estimated saving of 850 lives because of the lack of bad winter weather. Areas of major economic benefits (primarily in the nation's northern sections) included major reductions in expenditures (and costs) for natural gas and heating oil, record seasonal sales of retail products and homes, lack of spring flood damages, record construction levels, and savings in highway-based...

Optimal Cartel Pricing in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority

Abstract: The dynamic behavior of a price-fixing cartel is explored when it is concerned about creating suspicions that a cartel has formed. Consistent with preceding static theories, the cartel's steady-state price is decreasing in the damage multiple and the probability of detection. However, contrary to those theories, it is independent of the level of fixed fines. It is also shown that the cartel prices higher when a more competitive benchmark price is used in calculating damages.

The off-site costs of soil erosion

Abstract: MANY studies document the damage that sediment, nutrients, and other soil erosion-related pollutants cause in streams, lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries, but few studies attempt to calculate the economic costs of these damages. All recent economic studies are limited in the damage they consider, their geographic scopes, or, most commonly, both. The last estimate of national economic costs associated with erosion-related damages was made in 1946 ( 1 ). The Conservation Foundation recently completed a study that attempts to fill this gap ( 3 ). Any such attempt must grapple with numerous problems. Many damages are only weakly documented. If the damages are well documented, the linkage between them and soil erosion is probably not. Even if the damages and linkages are known, it is difficult to assign economic values to the damages. Thus, the estimates given here are indicative, not definitive. Instream damages Instream damages are those caused by sediment, nutrients, and other erosion-related contaminants in streams and lakes. These include damages to aquatic organisms, water-based recreation, water storage facilities, and navigation Biological impacts . Aquatic ecosystems can be seriously affected by sediment and other erosion-related contaminants in complex ways. Sediment can destroy spawning areas, food sources, and habitat as …

Courts Should Not Enforce Government Contracts

Abstract: Most scholars believe that courts should enforce government contracts, though they disagree about the extent to which liability or damages rules should trade off relevant considerations - the problem of governments holding up contractors, on the one hand, and the problem of governments using contracts in order to defer costs to future governments, on the other hand. These scholars, however, overestimate the ability of courts to affect policy outcomes. Courts cannot increase the welfare of current or future generations by enforcing government contracts. The reason is that enforcing contracts can benefit future generations only by increasing the credibility of their governments, but if the current government has not already tried to benefit future generations by complying with contracts voluntarily, then it will offset the effect of an adverse judgment by withdrawing value from the future using a policy instrument over which courts have no control.