Abstract

The paper examines whether intellectual property rights in art should be extended to the entire world. In earlier papers, the economics of patent rights have been examined and the argument made that world welfare is likely to fall if patent rights are extended to the entire world. This argument is recapitulated here with special attention to the assumptions that are needed for its validity. These assumptions are then reexamined in the context of markets for art to see whether the argument carries over. It is found that while most of the assumptions do carry over well enough to justify the argument, there are also certain circumstances that may require greater geographic extension of intellectual property rights in some cases.