SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
FRANDly fire: are industry standards doing more harm than good?
0 references·4 citing·15 second hop
FRANDly fire: are industry standards doing more harm than good? (2007)FRANDly fire: are industry standards doin…Implementing IT Standards in Software: Challenges and Recommendations for Organisations Planning Software Development Covering IT Standards (2019)Implementing IT Standards in …A cost‐based approach for calculating royalties for standard‐essential patents (SEPs) (2018)A cost‐based approach for cal…Compulsory Licensing in Germany (2014)Compulsory Licensing in Germa…A NAASTy alternative to RAND pricing commitments (2011)A NAASTy alternative to RAND …Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergencies (1998)An Estoppel Doctrine for Patented Standards (2009)Patents and Standards - A Comment on the German Federal Supreme Court Decision Orange Book Standard (2010)The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (1987)Economics of regulation and antitrust (1992)Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy (2000)The viability of FRAND: How the seminal landmark Microsoft ruling could impact the value of standard essential patents and the future of telecom standards (2016)A Simplified Model for Portfolio Analysis (1963)The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets (1965)THE VALUATION OF RISK ASSETS AND THE SELECTION OF RISKY INVESTMENTS IN STOCK PORTFOLIOS AND CAPITAL BUDGETS**This paper is another in a series of interrelated theoretical and statistical studies of corporate financial and investment policies being made under grants from the Rockefeller Foundation, and more recently the Ford Foundation, to the Harvard Business School. The generous support for this work is most gratefully acknowledged. The author is also much indebted to his colleagues Professors Bishop, Christenson, Kahr, Raiffa, and (especially) Schlaifer, for extensive discussion and commentary on an earlier draft of this paper; but responsibility for any errors or imperfections remains strictly his own.[Professor Sharpe's paper, “Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk” (Journal of Finance, September 1964) appeared after this paper was in final form and on its way to the printers. My first section, which parallels the first half of his paper (with corresponding conclusions), sets the algebraic framework for sections II, III and VI, (which have no counterpart in his paper) and for section IV on the equilibrium prices of risk assets, concerning which our results differ significantly for reasons which will be explored elsewhere. Sharpe does not take up the capital budgeting problem developed in section V below.] (1975)Applications of the levelized cost concept (2023)Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family (2023)Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation (2009)An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards (2011)Standard-Essential Patents (2015)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2018A cost‐based approach for calculating royalties for standard‐essential patents (SEPs)10 cited
  • 2011A NAASTy alternative to RAND pricing commitments10 cited
  • 2019Implementing IT Standards in Software: Challenges and Recommendations for Organisations Planning Software Development Covering IT Standards9 cited
  • 2014Compulsory Licensing in Germany8 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work