Policy makers and international institutions have long maintained that the global business environment is best supported when countries harmonize by adopting substantially uniform legal structures. This is particularly true in the context of intellectual property rights. When such national systems are similar, we believe that investment is undergirded and market participation is facilitated. However, this assumption may be incorrect in some cases. Marginal disharmony in certain intellectual property rights may provide countries space for experimentation while not impeding effective management of global intellectual property portfolios at the firm level. As evidence, we look to the utility model. This long-standing form of invention right is conspicuously and surprisingly unstandardized across the world, yet our analysis, using PATSTAT data, reveals that firms are able to negotiate this disharmony effectively. We employ a novel empirical method that tracks U.S.-priority patents to establish that firms use utility models to optimize their overall appropriability needs by region. Our study finds evidence that a firm may choose standard patent protection in one region and utility model protection in another, even though standard patent protection is available in both settings. We propose that a “zone of appropriability preference” exists when utility models and standard patents overlap, and this zone provides important strategic opportunities to firms with global intellectual property portfolios. Our study thus provides an important counter-case for harmonization of national intellectual property laws. As a result, we suggest that such efforts be undertaken with more caution; in some cases, harmonization may do more harm than good.

中文翻译：

---

法律协调总是更好吗？实用新型反案例

政策制定者和国际机构长期以来一直认为，当各国通过采用基本统一的法律结构进行协调时，全球商业环境得到最好的支持。在知识产权方面尤其如此。当这些国家体系相似时，我们认为投资得到加强，市场参与得到促进。然而，这种假设在某些情况下可能是不正确的。某些知识产权的边际不协调可能为各国提供试验空间，同时不会妨碍公司层面对全球知识产权组合的有效管理。作为证据，我们期待实用新型。这种长期存在的发明权形式在世界范围内明显且令人惊讶地未标准化，但我们使用 PATSTAT 数据的分析，表明企业能够有效地协商这种不和谐。我们采用一种新颖的实证方法来跟踪美国优先专利，以确定公司使用实用新型来优化其按地区划分的整体专有性需求。我们的研究发现证据表明，即使标准专利保护在两种情况下都可用，公司可能会在一个地区选择标准专利保护，而在另一个地区选择实用新型保护。我们建议当实用新型和标准专利重叠时存在“专有偏好区”，该区为拥有全球知识产权组合的公司提供了重要的战略机遇。因此，我们的研究为协调国家知识产权法提供了一个重要的反案例。因此，我们建议更加谨慎地进行此类努力；