Markets for standardized technologies: Patent licensing with principle of proportionality

Technovation - Tập 32 Số 9-10 - Trang 523-535 - 2012
Henri Hytönen1, Toni Jarimo2, Ahti Salo3, Erkki Yli-Juuti4
1Nordea Bank Finland, FI-00020 Nordea, Finland
2Nokia Corporation, P.O. Box 100, FI-00045 Nokia Group, Finland
3Systems Analysis Laboratory, Aalto University School of Science, P.O. Box 11100, FI 00076, Aalto, Finland
4Renesas Mobile Corporation, Porkkalankatu 24, 00180 Helsinki, Finland

Tóm tắt

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Andrews, 2006, When patents threaten science, Science, 314, 1395, 10.1126/science.1135872

Arora, 2001

Başar, 1982

Baldini, 2010, Do royalties really foster university patenting activity? An answer from Italy, Technovation, 30, 106, 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.007

Bass, 1969, A new product growth model for consumer durables, Management Science, 15, 215, 10.1287/mnsc.15.5.215

Bekkers, 2002, Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: the case of GSM, Research Policy, 31, 1141, 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00189-5

Bekkers, 2009, Standards, patents and mobile phones: lessons for ETSI's handling of UTMS, International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research, 7, 13, 10.4018/jitsr.2009010102

Blind, 2004, Interrelation between patenting and standardisation strategies: empirical evidence and policy implications, Research Policy, 33, 1583, 10.1016/j.respol.2004.08.007

Calderini, 2006, Standardisation in the ICT sector: the (complex) interface between antitrust and intellectual property, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15, 543, 10.1080/10438590500268256

Dolmans, M., 2002. Standards for Standards. Paper for American Bar Association, Section of Antitrust Law, Spring meeting, Accessed 27 June 2007. URL 〈http://www.abanet.org/antitrust/committees/intell_property/dolmans.pdf〉.

ETSI, 2007. ETSI Guide on Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). Version endorsed by Board #60 on 25 January 2007, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute, Accessed 4 February 2009. URL 〈http://www.etsi.org/WebSite/document/Legal/ETSI_Guide_on_IPRs.pdf〉.

ETSI, 2009. ETSI IPR policy. Extracted form the ETSI Rules of Procedure, 8 April 2009, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute, Accessed 10 October 2010. URL 〈http://www.etsi.org/WebSite/document/Legal/ETSI_IPR-Policy.pdf〉.

Fairfield Resources International, 2009. Review of Patents Declared as Essential to WCDMA Through December, 2008. Accessed 10 October 2010. URL 〈http://www.frlicense.com/wcdma1.pdf〉.

Farrel, 1985, Standardization, compatibility, and innovation, RAND Journal of Economics, 16, 70, 10.2307/2555589

Frain, T., 2006. Patents in Standards & Interoperability. World Intellectual Property Organization, 29 November 2006, Accessed 4 February 2009. URL 〈http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/2006/patent_colloquia/11/pdf/frain_paper.pdf〉.

Gandal, 2003, Standards in wireless telephone networks, Telecommunications Policy, 27, 325, 10.1016/S0308-5961(03)00026-0

Gartner, 2010. Gartner Says Worldwide Mobile Device Sales Grew 13.8 Percent in Second Quarter of 2010, but Competition Drove Prices Down. Accessed 10 October 2010. URL 〈http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1421013〉.

Greenhalgh, 2006, The value of innovation: the interaction of competition, R&D and IP, Research Policy, 35, 562, 10.1016/j.respol.2006.02.002

Grindley, 1997, Managing intellectual capital: licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics, California Management Review, 39, 8, 10.2307/41165885

Gruber, 2001, The evolution of markets under entry and standards regulation—the case of global mobile telecommunications, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 1189, 10.1016/S0167-7187(01)00069-8

Gupta, 2006, The interplay between exploration and exploitation, Academy of Management Journal, 49, 693, 10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083026

Hall, 1986, Patents and R and D: is there a lag?, International Economic Review, 27, 265, 10.2307/2526504

Hall, 2001, The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979–1995, RAND Journal of Economics, 32, 101, 10.2307/2696400

Hanel, 2006, Intellectual property rights business management practices: a survey of the literature, Technovation, 26, 895, 10.1016/j.technovation.2005.12.001

Hardin, 1968, The tragedy of the commons, Science, 168, 1243, 10.1126/science.162.3859.1243

Harhoff, 2003, Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights, Research Policy, 32, 1343, 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00124-5

Heller, 1998, The tragedy of the anticommons: property in the transition from Marx to markets, Harvard Law Review, 111, 621, 10.2307/1342203

Heller, 1998, Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research, Science, 280, 698, 10.1126/science.280.5364.698

Hurmelinna, 2007, The Janus face of the appropriability regime in the protection of innovations: theoretical re-appraisal and empirical analysis, Technovation, 27, 133, 10.1016/j.technovation.2005.09.011

Kalai, 1977, Proportional solutions to bargaining situations: interpersonal utility comparisons, Econometrica, 45, 1623, 10.2307/1913954

Katz, 1985, Network externalities, competition, and compatibility, American Economic Review, 75, 424

Katz, 1986, Technology adoption in the presence of network externalities, Journal of Political Economy, 94, 822, 10.1086/261409

Kerin, 1992, First-mover advantage: a synthesis, conceptual framework, and research propositions, Journal of Marketing, 56, 33, 10.2307/1251985

Kunc, 2007, Competitive dynamics and gaming simulation: lessons from a fishing industry simulator, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 1146, 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602246

Layne-Farrar, 2011, To join or not to join: examining patent pool participation and rent sharing rules, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 29, 294, 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2010.08.006

Lemley, 2005, Probabilistic patents, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 75, 10.1257/0895330054048650

Lemley, 2007, Patent holdup and royalty stacking, Texas Law Review, 85, 1991

Lerner, 2007, The design of patent pools: the determinants of licensing rules, RAND Journal of Economics, 38, 610, 10.1111/j.0741-6261.2007.00103.x

Lin, 2006, R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance, Journal of Business Research, 59, 679, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.01.002

Mahajan, 1995, Diffusion of new products: empirical generalizations and managerial uses, Marketing Science, 14, G79, 10.1287/mksc.14.3.G79

Megantz, 2002

Meniere, 2010, Decentralized licensing of complementary patents: comparing the royalty, fixed-fee and two-part tariff regimes, Information Economics and Policy, 22, 178, 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2009.10.003

Moore, 2005, Worthless patents, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 20, 1521

Nash, 1951, Non-cooperative games, Annals of Mathematics, 54, 286, 10.2307/1969529

Reuters, 2010. Factbox: Top Players in Ailing Mobile Network Gear Market. Accessed 10 October 2010. URL 〈http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66I2GF20100719?pageNumber=1〉.

Robinson, 1994, First-mover advantages from pioneering new markets: a survey of empirical evidence, Review of Industrial Organization, 9, 1, 10.1007/BF01024216

Roth, 1979, Proportional solutions to the bargaining problem, Econometrica, 47, 775, 10.2307/1910423

Salmenkaita, 2002, Rationales for government intervention in the commercialization of new technologies, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 14, 183, 10.1080/09537320220133857

Salmenkaita, 2004, Emergent foresight processes: industrial activities in wireless communications, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71, 897, 10.1016/j.techfore.2003.09.001

Scherer, 1965, Corporate inventive output, profits, and growth, Journal of Political Economy, 73, 290, 10.1086/259017

Shapiro, 2001, Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting, vol. 1, 119

Shapiro, C. Injunctions, hold-up, and patent royalties. American Law and Economics Review, doi:10.1093/aler/ahq014. In press.

Smits, 2004, The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 1, 4, 10.1504/IJFIP.2004.004621

Sterman, 2000

Sterman, 2001, System dynamics modeling: tools for learning in a complex world, California Management Review, 43, 8, 10.2307/41166098

Takalo, 2000, Do patents slow down technological progress? Real options in research, patenting, and market introduction, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 18, 1105, 10.1016/S0167-7187(98)00049-6

Teece, 1986, Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy, 15, 285, 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2

Teece, 2000

Telephia, 2006. Telephia European Subscriber and Device Report Q1 2006. Accessed 10 October 2010. URL 〈http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/May2006/3022.htm〉.

Thomson, 2003, Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey, Mathematical Social Sciences, 45, 249, 10.1016/S0165-4896(02)00070-7

Thumm, 2005, Patents for genetic inventions: a tool to promote technological advance or a limitation for upstream inventions, Technovation, 25, 1410, 10.1016/j.technovation.2004.07.009

West, 2003, How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies, Research Policy, 32, 1259, 10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00052-0

Ziedonis, 2004, Don't fence me in: fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms, Management Science, 50, 804, 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0208