Protectionism with respect to innovation entities and legal enforcement of innovation stimuli is an imperative for economic growth. However, innovations as a market factor have not strictly interpreted, meaning that mechanisms of their effects are not clear. The role of innovations for product markets is well defined in the American antitrust rules, especially their role in merger of companies and firms. However, their practical use of these rules is problematic, as implications of mergers caused by innovations can hardly be predicted. The main (doctrinal) problem faced by antitrust rules is accounting for innovations, as innovations are hardly identifiable and predictable, and not always appear as a direct response to a large investment in R&D. The most efficient approach seems to lie in evaluation of innovation effects on mergers of high tech companies. But this evaluation will be problematic due to uncertain relation between R&D and market promotion of new products and other marketing related factors with respect of a new product. Also, because innovations are a form of non-price competition, they cannot be taken as a conventional category for analysis. Furthermore, it's not always clear what kind of market conditions is favorable for innovations promotion. However, it's supposed that most of the above problems can be resolved in the framework of the existing antitrust rules, by inclusion of new groups of indicators that evaluate position of innovations in the market environment, effects of R&D markets, effects of traditional markets, effects of building up new markets, 'overlapping' effects of actors of various markets.