حقوق دارایی فکری اساسی و مشارکت مخترعان در استانداردسازی

نوع مقاله: ترجمه

نویسنده

دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران

چکیده

کسب حقوق دارایی فکری اساسی برای نوآوری و رقابت در صنعت شبکه ،جایی که استانداردسازی فنی نقشی حیاتی در توسعه ایفا می‌کند، حائز اهمیت است. ‌مطالعه‌ی حاضر با استفاده از پایگاه داده‌های ثبت‌اختراع به بررسی تجربی عوامل تعیین‌کننده‌ی حقوق دارایی فکری اساسی برای استانداردهای ارتباطات بی‌سیم می‌پردازد. تمرکز ویژه روی مشارکت مخترعان در استانداردسازی فنی است که با شناسایی و جمع‌آوری درخواست‌های ثبت‌اختراع آن‌ها انجام می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


Essential intellectual property rights and inventors’ involvement in standardization, Research Policy 44(2015) 483-492
Alcarcer, J., Gittelman,M., 2006. Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: the influence of examiner citations. Review of Economics and Statistics 88 (4), 774–779.
Alcacer, J., Gittleman, M., Sampat, B., 2009. Applicant and examiner citations in USpatents: an overview and analysis. Research Policy 38, 415–427.
Bekkers, R., Duysters, G., Verspagen, B., 2002. Intellectual property rights, strategictechnology agreements and market structure: the case of GSM. Research Policy31, 1141–1161.
Bekkers, R., West, J., 2009. The limits to IPR standardization policies as evidenced bystrategic patenting in UMTS. Telecommunications Policy 33, 80–97.
Bekkers, R., Bongard, R., Nuvolari, A., 2011. An empirical study on the determinants ofessential IPR claims in compatibility standards. Research Policy 40, 1001–1015.
Berger, F., Blind, K., Thumm, N., 2012. Filing behavior regarding essential IPRs inindustry standards. Research Policy 41, 216–225.
Carpenter, M., Narin, F., Woolf, P., 1981. Citation rates to technologically importantpatents. World Patent Information 3 (4), 160–163.
Criscuolo, P., Verspagen, B., 2008. Does it matter where patent citations come from?Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Research Policy 37 (10),1892–1908.
Dalman, E., Parkvall, S., Skold, J., Beming, P., 2008. 3G Evolution: HSPA and LTE forMobile Broadband, 2nd edition. Academic Press, Oxford, UK.
Dokko, G., Rosenkopf, L., 2010. Social capital for hire? Mobility of technical pro-fessionals and firm influence in wireless standards committees. OrganizationScience 21 (3), 677–695.
ETSI, 2012. Annex 6: ETSI Intellectual Property Rights Policy. ETSI Directives version29, January 2012, http://portal.etsi.org/directives/29directivesjan2012.pdf
ETSI, 2011. Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) Essential, or Potentially Essential IPRsNotified to ETSI in Respect to ETSI Standards, 2011 (ETSI SR 000 314 V2.10.1(2011-06)).
Fontana, R., Nuvolari, A., Verspagen, B., 2009. Mapping technological trajectoriesas patent citation networks. An application to data communication standards.Economics of Innovation and New Technologies 18, 311–336.
Gandal, N., Gantman, N., Genesove, D., 2006. Intellectual property and standard-ization committee participation in the US modem industry. In: Greenstein,S., Stango, V. (Eds.), Standards and Public Policy. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, UK, pp. 208–230.
Goodman, D.J., Myers, R.A., 2005. 3G cellular standards and patents. 2005International conference on wireless networks. Communications and MobileComputing, 415–420.
Goldsmith, A., 2005. Wireless Communications. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.
Hedge D., Sampat B., 2008. Examiner citations, applicant citations, and the privatevalue of patents. Economics Letters 105 (3), 287–289.
Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Fogarty, M.S., 2000. Knowledge spillovers and patentcitations: evidence from a survey of Inventors. American Economic Review 90,215–218.
Karki, M.M.S., 1997. Patent citation analysis: a policy analysis tool. World PatentInformation 19 (4), 269–272.
Lakoff, S., 2008. Upstart startup: constructed advantage and the example of Qual-comm. Technovation 28, 831–837.
Layne-Farrar, A., 2011. Innovative or indefensible? An empirical assessment ofpatenting within standard setting. International Journal of IT Standards andStandardization Research 9 (2), 1–18.
Leiponen, A.E., 2008. Competing through cooperation: standard-setting in wirelesstelecommunications. Management Science 54 (11), 1904–1919.
Leiponen, A., 2006. National styles in the setting of global standards: the relation-ship between firms’ standardization strategies and national origin. In: Zysman,J., Newman, A. (Eds.), How Revolutionary was the Digital Revolution? NationalResponses, Market Transitions, and Global Technology in the Digital Era. Stan-ford University Press, Stanford, California, pp. 350–372.
Martinelli, A., 2011. An emerging paradigm or just another trajectory? Under-standing the nature of technological changes using engineering heuristicsin the telecommunications switching industry. Research Policy 41 (2),414–429.
Mock, D., 2005. The Qualcomm Equation. American Management Association, NewYork.
Nagaoka, S., Motohashi, K., Goto, A., 2010. Patent statistics as an innovation indicator.In: Hall, B.H., Rosenberg, N. (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, vol.2. Academic Press, pp. 1083–1128.
Patel, P., Pavitt, K., 1997. The technological competencies of the world’s largestfirms: complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy 26,141–156.
Prahalad, C.K., Hamel, G., 1990. The core competence of the corporation. HarvardBusiness Review 68 (3), 79–91.
Rysman, M., Simcoe, T., Heath, C., 2008. Patents and the performance of voluntarystandard-setting organizations. Management Science 54, 1920–1934.Son, W., 2013. Samsung, History of Persistent Innovation – All of Winning Innova-tion, Korea.com (in Korean).
Tassey, G., 2000. Standardization in technology-based market. Research Policy 29,587–602.
Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., 1997. University versus corporate patents:a window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and NewTechnology 5 (1), 19–50.
Verspagen, B., 2007. Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks:a study on the history of fuel cell research. Advances in Complex Systems 10,93–115.