Emerging ways to address the reemerging conflict between patenting and technological standardization

被引：22
作者：
Bekkers, Rudi [2 ]
Iversen, Eric [1 ,3 ]
Blind, Knut [4 ,5 ,6 ]
机构：
[1] NIFU Nord Inst Studies Innovat Res & Educ, N-0302 Oslo, Norway
[2] Eindhoven Univ Technol, Sch Innovat Sci, NL-5600 MB Eindhoven, Netherlands
[3] Univ Tasmania, AIRC Australian Innovat Res Ctr, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia
[4] Fraunhofer Inst Open Commun Syst, D-10589 Berlin, Germany
[5] Berlin Inst Technol, D-10623 Berlin, Germany
[6] Erasmus Univ, Rotterdam Sch Management, NL-3062 PA Rotterdam, Netherlands
来源：
INDUSTRIAL AND CORPORATE CHANGE | 2012年 / 21卷 / 04期
关键词：
O34; O33; O32;
D O I：
10.1093/icc/dtr067
中图分类号：
F [经济];
学科分类号：
02 ;
摘要：
The relationship between standards and intellectual property rights (IPRs) is a complementary but troubled one. The way it is managed affects the way stakeholders contribute to standards and may ultimately affect the way some technologies and even industries evolve. A spate of recent legal controversies has been accompanied by the emergence of new mechanisms to help govern the risk of conflict here. This article provides an empirical analysis of these attempts to reconcile the aims of these regimes.
引用
收藏
页码：901 / 931
页数：31
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2009, PROFESSIONAL MOBILE
[2]  
Aoki R., 2004, WP0501 IIR
[3]  
Baron J., 2010, STRATEGIC INPUTS PAT
[4]  
Bekkers R., 2001, ARTECH MOBIL COMMUN
[5]  
Bekkers R., 2006, CASE STUDIES INTERFA
[6]   An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards [J].
Bekkers, Rudi ;
Bongard, Rene ;
Nuvolari, Alessandro .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2011, 40 (07) :1001-1015
[7]   The limits to IPR standardization policies as evidenced by strategic patenting in UMTS [J].
Bekkers, Rudi ;
West, Joel .
TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY, 2009, 33 (1-2) :80-97
[8]  
Berger F., 2012, RES POLICY IN PRESS
[9]  
Berlind, 2005, ZDNET 0929
[10]   Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany [J].
Blind, K ;
Edler, J ;
Frietsch, R ;
Schmoch, U .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2006, 35 (05) :655-672
12345