National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 8 IPR and Standards in Emerging Economies
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

References

Adams, J., D. Pendlebury and B. Stembridge. 2013. Building Bricks: Exploring the Global Research and Innovation Impact of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Korea. Thomson Reuters. Available: http://sciencewatch.com/sites/sw/files/swarticle/media/grr-brick.pdf.

Ahnrens, N. 2012. National Security and China’s Information Security Standards. Washington D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Almunia, J. 2012. Competition Policy for Innovation and Growth: Keeping Markets Open and Efficient. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-172_en.htm?locale=en.

AmCham China. 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013. White Papers Available: http://www.amchamchina.org/whitepaper.

American Bar Association. 2007. Standards Development Patent Policy Manual. Chicago: American Bar Association.

American National Standards Institute. Rev 2008. 3.1 ANSI Patent Policy - Inclusion of Patents in American National Standards. Washington, D.C.: ANSI.

An, B. 2012. The Global Governance of Standardization: The Challenges of Convergence. Research Center for Chinese Politics and Business Working Paper No. 32. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.

AVS. 2008. Intellectual Property Rights Policy of the Audio Video Coding Standard Working Group of China. Available: http://www.avs.org.cn/en.

Barbosa, D. 2012. Intellectual Property and Standards in Brazil. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Bekkers, R. and A. Martinelli. 2012. Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators. Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 79:1192-1216.

Bekkers, R. and A. Updegrove. 2012. A Study of IPR Policies and Practices of a Representative Group of Standards-Setting Organizations Worldwide. Available: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18510.

Blind, K. 2011. Study on the Interplay between Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). Tender No: ENTR/09/015 OJEU S136 of 18/07/2009, Final Report. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/european-standards/files/standards_policy/ipr-workshop/ipr_study_final_report_en.pdf.

Breznitz, D. and M. Murphree. 2012. Shaking Grounds? Technology Standards in China. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Chia, T. 2012. Fighting the smartphone patent war with RAND-encumbered patents, Berkeley Tech. L.J. 27: 209-240.

Clougherty, J. and M. Grajek. 2012. International Standards and International Trade: Evidence from ISO 9000 Diffusion. National Bureau Economics Research Working Paper 18132. Cambridge, MA.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

Contreras, J. 2013. Technical standards and ex ante disclosure: results and analysis of an empirical study. Jurimetrics J. 53:163-211.

Contreras, J. 2013. Fixing FRAND: a pseudo-pool approach to standards-based patent licensing. Antitrust L.J. 79:1-43.

Contreras, J. 2012. Survey of Bioinformatics Standards. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Contreras, J. and C. McManis. 2012. Materials Sustainability Standards and Intellectual Property. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Damien Geradin, Anne Layne-Farrar, and A. Jorge Padilla, The Complements Problem Within Standard Setting: Assessing The Evidence On Royalty Stacking, B.U. J. Sci. & Tech. L., Vol. 14:144-176.

DeNardis, L. 2012. E-government Acquisition Processes in the U.S., EU, India and Japan. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Department of Telecommunications. 2013. Statement of Intent by India, Global Standards Collaboration Conference, Jeju Island, Korea. Available: http://www.tta.or.kr/include/Download.jsp?filename=externalDocument/GSC17-PLEN84_India_s_Statement_at_GSC_Korea.docx.

Ernst, D. 2006. Innovation Offshoring: Asia’s Emerging Role in Global Innovation Networks. East-West Center Special Reports Number 10. Honolulu, HI.

Ernst, D. 2011. Indigenous Innovation and Globalization: The Challenge for China’s Standardization Strategy. La Jolla, CA: University of California Institute of Global Conflict and Cooperation. Honolulu, HI.

Ernst, D. and S. Martin. 2010. The Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation – Implications for China’s Policy on Information Security Standards. East-West Center Working Paper No. 108. Honolulu, HI.

European Telecommunications Standards Institute Rules of Procedure. Annex 6: ETSI Intellectual Property Rights Policy. 2013. Available: http://www.etsi.org/images/files/IPR/etsi-ipr-policy.pdf.

European Commission. Directorate-General for Competition Press Release. 2013. Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Motorola Mobility on potential misuse of mobile phone standard essential patents. Brussels. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-406_en.htm.

European Commission, Directorate-General for Competition Press Release. 2012. Commission Sends Statement of Objections to Samsung on potential misuse of mobile phone standard-essential patents. Brussels. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressrelease_IP-12-1448_en.htm.

European Commission, Directorate-General for Competition Memo. 2012. Samsung – Enforcement of ETSI Standards Essential Patents (SEPs). Brussels. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-1021_en.htm.

European Commission, Directorate-General for Competition Press Release. 2012. Commission Opens Proceedings Against Motorola. Brussels. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-345_en.htm.

European Commission. 2012. Google-Motorola Mobility Merger Procedure Article 6(1)(b) Decision. Case No. Comp/M. 6381. Luxembourg. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m6381_20120213_20310_2277480_EN.pdf.

European Commission. O.J. 2011. Communication from the Commission on Guidelines on the Applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU to Horizontal Co-operation Agreements. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:011:0001:0072:EN:PDF.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

European Commission. 2010. Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal co-operation agreements, SEC 528/2. Brussels. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2010_horizontals/guidelines_en.pdf.

Executive Office of the President. 2013. Patent Assertion and U.S. Innovation. The White House, Washington, D.C. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/patent_report.pdf.

Farrell, J. J. Hayes, C. Shapiro, and T. Sullivan. 2007. “Standard setting, patents, and hold-up. Antitrust Law Journal. 74:603-670.

Gallini, N. and B. D. Wright. 1990. Technology transfer under asymmetric information. RAND Journal of Economics. 21(1):147-160.

Gilbert, R. 2011. Deal or no deal? licensing negotiations in standard-setting organizations. Antitrust L. J. 77:855-888.

Global ICT Standardisation Forum for India. GISFI Membership List. Available: http://www.gisfi.org/membership.php.

Goudelis, M. 2012. Presentation on EPO Cooperation with Standards Development Organisations. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_072825.

Government of India. Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. Department of Information Technology. 2010. Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance. Available: http://egovernance.gov.in/policy/policy-on-open-standards-for-e-governance/Policy%20on%20Open%20Standards%20for%20e-Governance.pdf.

Government of India. Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. Department of Information Technology. 2012. National Telecom Policy 2012. Available: http://www.dot.gov.in/ntp/NTP-06.06.2012-final.pdf.

Hesse, Renata. 2012. Six “Small” Proposals for SSOs Before Lunch (Remarks as Prepared for the ITU-T Patent Roundtable). United States Department of Justice. Washington, D.C. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/speeches/287855.pdf.

Huang, T. and C. Reader. 2013. China’s ABS Intellectual Property Rights Policy - A New Approach for Developing Open Standards. Available: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.nbr.org%2Fdownloads%2FCS09_HUANG_slides_EN.ppt&ei=GN_UUOfiMMjxigL6lYD4DQ&usg=AFQjCNGq3lItnZaPOmBgV5Mxtyl2qMIqkw&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE&cad=rja.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-Standards Association. 2011. IEEE Announces Standards Interest Group (SIG) for India: Move to Propel India’s Involvement in the IEEE Global Standards Process. Available: http://standards.ieee.org/news/2011/sig.html.

International Telecommunications Union. 2012. Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC 23/04/02. Available: http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/04/04/T04040000010003PDFE.pdf.

International Telecommunications Union. 2012. Joint ITU-GISFI Workshop on Bridging the Standardization Gap: Sustainable Rural Communications. Available: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/Workshops-and-Seminars/bsg/Pages/default.aspx.

InterDigital, Inc. Invention Collaboration Contribution: InterDigital Annual Report. 2012. Delaware. Available: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/IDCC/2696817853x0x657871/3375CC54-04CA-4694-83E4-DEBCB7508F97/2012_Annual_Report_and_2013_Proxy_Statement.pdf.

Ipeg. 2011 Nokia v. IPcom Ongoing UMTS Patent Litigation in Germany. Available: http://www.ipeg.eu/nokia-vs-ipcom-ongoing-umts-patent-litigation-in-germany/.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

Jillavenkatesa, A., H. Evans, and H. Wixon. 2012. Patents and Intellectual Property Management in Nanotechnology: A NIST Perspective. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_072825.

Kesan, Jay and C. Hayes. 2012. Patent Transfers in the Information Age: FRAND Commitments and Transparency. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Kai-Uwe K., F. Scott Morton, and H. Shelanski. 2013. Standard Setting Organizations Can Help Solve the Standard Essential Patents Licensing Problem. Competition Policy International Antitrust Chronicle. Available: https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/assets/Free/ScottMortonetalMar-13Special.pdf.

Kramler, T. 2012. FRAND Commitments and EU Competition Law. Available: www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/06/5B/T065B0000360016PPTE.ppt.

Layne-Farrar, A., J. Padilla, and R. Schmalensee. 2007. Pricing Patents for Licensing in Standard-Setting Organizations: Making Sense of FRAND Commitments. CEMFI Working Paper No. 0702. Madrid. Available: ftp://ftp.cemfi.es/wp/07/0702.pdf.

Lemley, M. and C. Shapiro. 2007. Patent holdup and royalty stacking. Texas Law Review 85:1991-2049.

Lemley, M. 2002. Intellectual Property Rights and Standard-Setting Organizations. Calif. L. Rev. 90:1889-1980.

Li, W. (n.d.). The Intellectual Property Issue in the Standardization Process: A Case Study From China’s Experience. Available: http://www.thebolingroup.com/unifier_divider/powerpoint_slides/wenwenli.pdf.

Majoras, D. 2012. Dissenting Statement of Chairman Majoras In the Matter of Negotiated Data Solutions, LLC, File No. 0510094. Federal Trade Commission, Washington: D.C.

Majoras, D. 2005. Recognizing the Procompetitive Potential of Royalty Discussions in Standard Setting. Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C.

Maskus, K. 2012. Private Rights and Public Problems: The Global Economics of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century, Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Merrill, T. and H. E. Smith. 2000. Optimal Standardization in the Law of Property: The Numerus Clausus Principle, Yale L.J. 110:1-70.

Mock, V. 2012. Samsung Drops Injunctions Applications Against Apple. The Wall Street Journal. Available: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324407504578187043081010804.html.

Moenius, J. 2004. Information versus Product Adaptation: The Role of Standards in Trade. Working Paper. Northwestern University Kellogg School, Evanston IL.

Nylen, L. and M. Swift. 2013. Chinese Court Eye Proper Royalty Rates for Patents Essential to Industry Standards. Available: http://www.mlex.com/US/content.aspx?ID=360997.

Office of Management and Budget. 1998. OMB Circular A-119; Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities. Final Revision. 63 FR 8546. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a119.

Ono, N. 2012. Avoid Japanization: Lessons from Japanese Gridlock on Patent Assignment Recordation System. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2015119.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2008. The Internationalisation of Business R&D: Evidence, Impacts and Implications. Paris: OECD.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2012. OECD Science, Industry, and Technology Outlook. Paris: OECD.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

Prud’homme, D. 2012. Dulling the Cutting-Edge: How Patent-Related Policies and Practices Hamper Innovation in China. European Chamber. Available: http://www.europeanchamber.com.cn/documents/confirm/en/52175d3bdf80f/en/pdf/14

Raes, S. 2010. Who needs standards related patent registers and what should they look like? Presentation at the European Commission Workshop on Tensions between IPR & Standards. Brussels.

Ramakrishna, T., S.K. Murthy, and S. Makhotra. 2012. Intellectual Property in ICT Standards in India Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

Ramirez, E. 2012. Prepared Statement of the Federal Trade Commission before the United States Committee on the Judiciary Concerning Oversight of the Impact on Competition Orders to Enforce Standard-Essential Patents. Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/ramirez/120711sep-stmtofftc.pdf.

Rizzolo, M. 2013. Essential Patent Blog. Huawei, ZTE Seek Stay of InterDigital 3G/4G ITC Investigation. Available: http://essentialpatentblog.com/2013/02/huawei-zte-seek-stay-of-interdigital-3g4g-itc-investigation/.

Robinson, F. and A. Torello. 2011. Wall Street Journal, 2nd Update: EU: Requested Apple, Samsung Mobile Patent Data.

Robinson, G. 2004. Personal Property Servitudes. U.Chi. L.Rev. 71(4):1449-1523.

Salant, D.J. 2009. Formulas for Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory Royalty Determination. International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research. 7(1): 66-75.

Scott-Morton, F. 2012. The Role of Standards in the Current Patent Wars. U.S. Department of Justice, Washington: D.C. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/speeches/289708.pdf.

Shaohua, Shi. 2007. Introduction of the CESI IPR Policy Template. Standardization Development Research Center, China Electronics Standardization Institute. Available: http://docbox.etsi.org/workshop/2007/2007_IPR_Symposium/012.1%20EN%20%20CESI_SHI%20SHAOHUA.pdf.

Sharma, C. 2012. Global Mobile State of the Union 2012. Available: http://www.chetansharma.com/research.htm.

Spence, A. M. 1973. Job Market Signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 87: 355-374.

Standards Administration of China. 2013. Regulatory Measures on National Standards Involving Patents (Interim). Available: http://sunsteinlaw.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013_01_IP_Update_PRC.pdf.

Suttmeier, R. and X. Yao. 2011. China’s IP Transition: Rethinking Intellectual Property Rights in a Rising China. National Bureau of Asian Research. Available: http://www.nbr.org/publications/issue.aspx?id=232.

Swanson, D. and W. Baumol. 2005. Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory (FRAND) Royalties, Standards Selection, and Control of Market Power. Antitrust Law Journal 73(1):1-58.

Tapia, C 2010. Industrial Property Rights, Technical Standards and Licensing Practices (FRAND) in the Telecommunications Industry. Germany: Heymanns Verlag GmbH.

Torrance, A. and L. Kahl. 2012. Synthetic Biology Standards and Intellectual Property. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/step/PGA_058712.

U.S. Department of Justice. 2006. Business Review Letter to VMEbus International Trade Association. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/busreview/219380.htm.

U.S. Department of Justice. 2007. Business Review Letter to Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/busreview/222978.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

U.S. Federal Trade Commission. 2011. The Evolving IP Marketplace: Aligning Patent Notice and Remedies with Competition. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2011/03/110307patentreport.pdf.

U.S. Federal Trade Commission Press. 2011. Press Release: FTC Order Restores Competition in U.S. Market for Equipment Used to Recharge Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems: Under Settlement, Bosch Agrees to Sell RTI Brand to Mahle Clevite, Inc. and to Make Certain Patents Available to Competitors. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/11/bosch.shtm.

U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. 2007. Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/hearings/ip/222655.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice and United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2013. Policy Statement on Remedies for Standard-Essential Patents Subject to Voluntary F/RAND Commitments. Available: http://www.uspto.gov/about/offices/ogc/Final_DOJ-PTO_Policy_Statement_on_FRAND_SEPs_1-8-13.pdf.

USITO. 2007. Chinese ICT Standards Landscape. United States Information Technology Office, Beijing. Issue Paper No. 621. Available: http://read.pudn.com/downloads141/doc/607628/chinese-ICT-standards.pdf.

Ward, J. 2012. Revenue for Mobile Communications Equipment to Climb in the Double Digits by Year End: Smartphones, Tablets, and 4G LTE Help Move Forward in Spite of Soft Global Economy. IHS iSuppli Market Research. Available: http://www.isuppli.com/Mobile-and-Wireless-Communications/MarketWatch/pages/Revenue-for-Mobile-Communications-Equipment-to-Climb-in-the-Double-Digits-by-Year-End.aspx.

Wayland, J. 2012. Oversight of the Impact of Competition of Exclusion Orders to Enforce Standards-Essential Patents. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Available: http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/testimony/284982.pdf.

Willingmyre, G. 2009. China’s Proposed Regulations for Patent-Involving National Standards. Available: http://www.ip-watch.org/2009/12/21/take-two-china%E2%80%99s-proposed-regulations-for-patent-involving-national-standards/.

Willingmyre, G. 2010. China’s Latest Draft Proposal Rules for Patents in Standards a Step Forward? Available: http://www.ip-watch.org/2010/04/01/china%E2%80%99s-latest-draft-disposal-rules-for-patents-in-standards-a-step-forward/.

World Intellectual Property Organization. (as amended by the Law of July 31, 2009). Germany’s Patent Law Section 15 (3). Available: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=238776.

Yeh, B. 2012. Availability of Injunctive Relief for Standard-Essential Patent Holders. Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C.

JUDICIAL CASES

A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co., 960 F.3d 1020, 1032 (Fed. Cir. 1992).

Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 869 F. Supp. 2d 901 (N.D. Ill. June 22, 2012).

Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., Nos. 2012-1548, 2012-1549 (Fed. Cir.).

Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al. (Supreme Court no. 12-398, 2013).

In re Dell Corporation, Dell VESA case, No. C-3658. 121 F.T.C. 616 (May 20, 1996).

eBay v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006).

Fujitsu Ltd. v. Netgear Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 26722 (Fed. Cir., Nov. 1, 2010).

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp, 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970).

Huawei v. ZTE, 2013, Regional Court of Düsseldorf, Federal Republic of Germany, Case No. 4b O 104/12.

In re Proxim Corporation, et al., Debtors, In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, Case No. 05-11639 (PJW) (Jointly Administered) (Chapter 11). Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0511639/0511639.shtm.

In the Matter of Google Inc., FTC File No. 121-0120. (Jan. 3, 2013). Separate Statement of Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch Regarding Google’s Standard-Essential Patents Enforcement Practices. No. C-Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1210120/130103googlemotorolaroschstmt.pdf.

Illinois Tool Works Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 126 (2006).

IPCom v. Nokia and HTC (2012) EWCA Civ 56.

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v. SK Kassetten GmbH & Co. District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 17 March 2010, Joint Cases No. 316533/HA ZA 08-2522 and 316535/HA ZA 08-2524.

KSR International. Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. 550 U.S. 398 (2007).

Motorola v. Microsoft, Regional Court of Mannheim, Federal Republic of Germany, Case No. 2 O 240/11. (2012).

Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., No. C10-1823JLR, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170587 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 30, 2012).

Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 871 F. Supp. 2d 1089 (W.D. Wash. 2012), aff’d, 696 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2012).

In the Matter of Motorola Mobility LLC, FTC File No. 121-0120, No. C- (Jan. 3, 2013). http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/1210120/130103googlemotorolado.pdf.

Motorola v. Apple, 2012, Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe, Federal Republic of Germany, Case No. 6 U 136/11.

In re Negotiated Data Solutions LLC, FTC File No. 051-0094. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0510094/080122do.pdf.

Pratt v. Wilcox Mfg. Co., 64 F. 589 (N.D. Ill. 1893).

Qualcomm, Inc. v. Broadcomm, Inc., No. 2007-1545 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 1, 2008).

Radio Systems Corp. v. Lalor, No 2012-123 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Rambus Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG., 318 F. 3d. 1081, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. AOL, LLC et al., Case No. 10-1002 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, No. C-4377 (Nov. 26, 2012).

Samsung v. Apple, District Court of The Hague, 20 June 2012, case numbers/docket numbers 400367/HA ZA 11-2212, 400376/HA ZA 11-2213 and 400385/HA ZA 11-22 15.

Spindelfabrik Suessen-Schurr Stahlecker & Grill v. Schubert & Salzer Maschinenfabrik AG, 829 F.2d 1075 (Fed. Cir. 1987).

SRI International Inc v. Internet Security Systems Inc., 511 F.3d 1186 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

TransCore LP v. Electronic Transaction Consultants Corporation, 563 F3d 1271(5th Cir 2009).

Wang Laboratories Inc. v. Mitsubishi Electronics America, Inc., 103 F.3d 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Case No COMP/M.6381 Google/Motorola Mobility, Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 Merger Procedure (2012) Available: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m6381_20120213_20310_2277480_EN.pdf.

Third Party United States Federal Trade Commission’s Statement on the Public Interest. In the Matter of Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related Software, and

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×

Components Thereof, Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding (May 18, 2012). Inv. No. 337-TA-752. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/06/1206ftcgamingconsole.pdf.

Third Party United States Federal Trade Commission’s Statement on the Public Interest. In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, Computers and Components Thereof, Notice Regarding Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337. (April 24, 2012). Inv. No. 337-TA-745. Available: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/06/1206ftcwirelesscom.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2013. Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18510.
×
Page 148
Next: Appendix A: Acronyms »
Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communications Technology Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $44.00 Buy Ebook | $35.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Patent Challenges for Standard-Setting in the Global Economy: Lessons from Information and Communication Technology examines how leading national and multinational standard-setting organizations (SSOs) address patent disclosures, licensing terms, transfers of patent ownership, and other issues that arise in connection with developing technical standards for consumer and other microelectronic products, associated software and components, and communications networks including the Internet. Attempting to balance the interests of patent holders, other participants in standard-setting, standards implementers, and consumers, the report calls on SSOs to develop more explicit policies to avoid patent holdup and royalty-stacking, ensure that licensing commitments carry over to new owners of the patents incorporated in standards, and limit injunctions for infringement of patents with those licensing commitments. The report recommends government measures to increase the transparency of patent ownership and use of standards information to improve patent quality and to reduce conflicts of laws across countries.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!