Explain why, in the absence of a patent, a technical innovation invented and pioneered in one tofu factory will cause the supply curve for the entire tofu industry to shift to the right. What will finally halt the rightward shift? Use supply and demand curves to demonstrate what happens. If the government grants a patent to the one tofu firm that developed the innovation, what type of market for the newly innovated and differentiated product would result (ie perfect competition, monopolistic competition, oligopoly, or monopoly)? Why would the government do this? What would happen to price and consumer surplus under a patent?

We should start by assuming that before the technological break through is made, the tofu industry is at equilibrium. The new technology will result in the production costs of tofu decreasing, which will shift the supply curve to the right. At first, production costs of just the innovative firm will decrease, but eventually other firms will catch up with the new technology. In the short run, the innovative firm will be able to make an economic profit since the industry will not have reached equilibrium. But after a while, as more firms adopt the new technology, equilibrium will be reached and economic profit will disappear (halting the rightward shift).

If the government grants a patent to the innovative firm that developed the new technology, then a monopoly might result. This is something similar to monopolies resulting from patents in the pharmaceutical industry. The profits of this specific company will increase, resulting in economic profit. Governments hand out patents as a way to reward innovation and encourage it. Imagine if patents didn't exist, how many companies would invest billions in R&D if they know that their competition will use that research for free?

When patents are granted, prices increase, and consumer surplus decreases.

107x106 is the answer

1. avoid them

2. a talk with them

3. ask someone you trust

4. ignore

5. call police