The Harbridge study suggests that t

The Harbridge study suggests that the relative importance of the
markets implicated by a compulsory license matters with respect to innovation.
In the case of the “licenses” analyzed, the contractors faced the
loss of exclusivity in the civilian sector, which was their primary, most
important market. In contrast, the licenses studied by the Eastman Commission
implicated the Canadian market, which was viewed as less important
by pharmaceutical patent holders. The implication of these two data
points is that where the impacted market is important (as in the Harbridge
study), an adverse impact on development may be more likely than where
the impacted market is unimportant (as in the Eastman study).

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Studi Harbridge menunjukkan bahwa kepentingan relatif dari
pasar terlibat dengan lisensi wajib penting sehubungan dengan inovasi.
Dalam kasus "lisensi" dianalisis, kontraktor menghadapi
kehilangan eksklusivitas di sektor sipil, yang utama mereka, sebagian besar
pasar yang penting. Sebaliknya, lisensi dipelajari oleh Komisi Eastman
terlibat pasar Kanada, yang dipandang sebagai kurang penting
oleh pemegang paten farmasi. Implikasi dari dua data ini
titik adalah bahwa di mana pasar dampak penting (seperti dalam Harbridge
studi), berdampak buruk terhadap pembangunan mungkin lebih mungkin dibandingkan di mana
pasar yang terkena dampak tidak penting (seperti dalam studi Eastman).