請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63320
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 郭瑞祥 | |
dc.contributor.author | CHEN CHIH YUAN | en |
dc.contributor.author | 陳志遠 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-16T16:34:43Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-01-16 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2013-01-16 | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2012-11-13 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Bloomberg BusinessWeek, April2-April 8, 2012, 58-63.
2. Ernst H., “Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analysis on the smartphone firm level”, Research policy, 2001, 30, 143-157. 3. Tseng F. M., et. al., “Using patent data to analyze trends and the technological strategies of the amorphous silicon thin-film solar cell industry”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2011, 78, 332-345. 4. Chiu Y. C., et. al., “Technological diversification, complementary assets, and performance”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2008, 75, 875-892. 5. Trajtenberg M., “Innovation in Israel in 1968-1997: a comparative analysis using patent data”, Research policy, 2001, 30, 363-389. 6. Merz J. F. and Pace N. M., Trends in patent litigation: the apparent influence of strengthened patents attributable to the court of appeals for the Federal circuit, Journal Patent & Trademark Office Society, 1994, 76, 579. 7. Moore K. A., Judges, Juries, and patent cases-an empirical peek inside the black box, Michigan Law Review, 2000, 99, 365. 8. H. H. Su, C. M. L. Chen, and P. C. Lee, Patent litigation precaution method: analyzing characteristics of US litigated and non-litigated patents from 1976 to 2010, Scientometrics, 2012 9. Dixit A. K., Pinduck R. S., and Davis G. A., Investment under uncertainty (vol. 15), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994. 10. Bessen J., and Meurer M., The patent litigation explosion, Boston University School of Law Working Paper, 2005, No. 05-18. 11. Lanjouw J. O., Schankerman M., “Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition”, The Rand Journal of Economics, 2001, 32 (1), 129-151. 12. Anthony Breitzman and Patrick Thomas, “Using patent citation analysis to target/value M&A canditates”, research technology management, 45, 2002, 228-236. 13. Teece D. J., “Information sharing, innovation, and antitrust”, 1994, Antitrust Law Journal, 62(2), 465-481. 14. Arora A., and Fosfuri A., “Licensing the market or technology”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2003, 52, 277-295. 15. Shane S., “Technology regimes and new smartphone smartphone firms formation”, Management Science, 2001, 47, 1173-1190. 16. Anand B., and Khanna T., “The structure of licensing contracts”, 2000, Journal of Industrial Economics, 2000, 48, 103-135. 17. Hall B. H., and Ziedonis R. H., “The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the U. S. semiconductor industry, 1979-1995”, 2001, Rand Journal of Economics, 32, 101-128. 18. Arora A., Fosfuri A., and Gambardella A., “Market for Technology”, 2001, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 19. Sadao N., Hyeog U. K., “The incidence of cross-licensing: A theory and new evidence on the smartphone firm and contract level determinants”, 2006, Research policy, 35, 1347-1361. 20. Yu-Shan Chen and Bi-Yu Chen, “Utilizing patent analysis to explore the cooperative competition relationship of the two LED smartphone smartphone firms: Nichia and Osram”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2011, 78, 294-302. 21. Florian Berger, Knut Blind, and Nikolaus Thumm, “Filing behaviour regarding essential patents in industry standards”, 2012, Research policy, 41, 216-225. 22. Kristina B. Dahlin, and Dean M. Behrens, “When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness” , 2005, Research policy, 34, 717-737. 23. Hagedoorn J., and Cloodt M., “Measuring innovation performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?”, Research Policy, 2003, 32, 1365-1379. 24. Arundel A., and Kabla J., “What percentage of innovations is patented? Experimental estimates in European smartphone smartphone firms” Research Policy, 1998, 27, 127-142. 25. Meyer M., “What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency.” Scientometrics, 2007, 70(3), 779-810. 26. Chen Jennifer H., Jang Show-Ling, and Wen Sonya H., “Measuring technological diversification: identifying the effects of patent scale and patent scope”, 2010, Scientometrics, 84, 265-275. 27. Nicolas V. Z., Bruno V. P. D. L. P., Wook H., “Issues in measuring the degree of technological specialization with patent data”, 2006, Scientometrics, 66(3), 481-492. 28. Jean O. L., and Mark S., “Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition”, 2001, RAND journal of economics, 32(1), 129-151. 29. Dietmar H., Frederic M. S., and Katrin V., “Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights”, 2003, Research Policy, 32, 1343-1363 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63320 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本論文檢視北美地區智慧型手機產業中企業專利資產與專利策略之間的關係。本文所稱的專利策略包括:專利侵權訴訟、專利單向授權、專利交叉授權、與專利購買策略。使用專利4階IPC代碼取得企業的核心技術領域。在這些核心技術領域中比較雙方企業的專利數與平均專利引證數以決定哪一個企業具有技術上的競爭優勢。研究結果顯示在專利數量以及質量上具有絕對優勢的企業通常會採取專利訴訟策略以阻擋對方企業進入市場以獲得得到較高的市佔率。相反地,當企業的專利資產較為稀少時,通常需要經由外部取得專利以保護其產品。專利單向授權策略是對公司擁有巨額研發投資下,活化其無形資產的一個好例子。因為企業通常可以經由專利授權活動獲得權利金收入。而當雙方公司在對方的核心技術領域中具有優異的專利佈局時,此時會提供企業雙方一個很好的誘因採取專利交叉授權策略,並且得到一個雙贏的狀態。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | This thesis examined the relationships between corporation patent assets and four patent strategies - patent infringement lawsuit, patent unilateral licensing, patent cross license and patent purchase - in the North America region. Utilizing 4-digit IPC code of the patent is to extract the core technology areas of the smartphone firm. The comparison of the patent counts with average patent citations in the both smartphone firms’ core technology fields can determine which smartphone firm has competitive advantage in these core technology areas. The results showed that smartphone firms with abundant patent asset in quantity and quality usually take patent infringement lawsuit strategy to block rivals outside the market and to obtain more market share. On the contrary, smartphone firms with scarce patent asset usually need to acquire external patents for the purpose of protecting their products. Patent unilateral licensing strategy, in the case of smartphone firms with huge R&D investments, plays a significant role in activating intangible intellectual asset, since smartphone firms can earn loyalty via unilateral patent license activity. On the other hand, in cases where one of any two smartphone firms possesses predominant patents, whatever in quantity or quality, in the other’s core technology fields, the thesis reveals empirical outcome that it would take patent cross license strategy so as to obtain a win-win situation. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T16:34:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-101-R98741073-1.pdf: 5213338 bytes, checksum: edf01c5e49a4ea424f88314d827160fa (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. LITERATURE SURVEY 3 2.1 The North America smartphone industry 3 2.2 The common intellectual property strategies used in the high technology industry 5 2.2.1 Patent infringement litigation 6 2.2.2 Patent purchase or selling (i.e. M&A) 6 2.2.3 Patent License 7 2.2.4 Patent cross license 7 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 8 3.1 Sample and data collection 8 3.2 Measurements 10 3.2.1 Patent counts analysis. 10 3.2.2 Herfindal-Hirschman Index of patents analysis (HHI analysis) 10 3.2.3 Core technology analysis 11 3.2.4 4-digit sub-classes of IPC analysis. 11 3.2.5 Patent citation analysis. 12 3.2.6 Dominant technology fields analysis 12 3.2.7 Determination of dominant player in both firms’ core technology fields 12 4 RESEARCH RESULT & DISCUSSION 14 4.1 Result of investigating IPRs relationship in smartphone industry 14 4.2 Patent counts analysis in smartphone industry 15 4.3 Comparison of patent counts and citations between IPRs relationship smartphone smartphone firms …16 5 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 21 5.1 Research conclusion 21 5.1.1 Mode I: Smartphone firm with dominant technology fields in both smartphone smartphone firms’ top ten 4-digit technology fields 21 5.1.2 Model II: Smartphone firm with dominant technology fields just in its top ten 4-digit technology fields not in corresponding smartphone firm’s top ten 4-digit technology fields 21 5.1.3 Model III:Smartphone firm with inferior technology fields in both smartphone smartphone firms’ top ten 4-digit technology fields 22 5.1.4 Model IV:Smartphone firm with dominant technology fields just in corresponding smartphone firm’s top ten 4-digit technology fields not in its top ten 4-digit technology fields 22 5.2 Managerial implication 23 5.3 Future direction suggestion 24 APPENDIX…………………………………………………………………………………...43 REFERENCE………………………………………………………………………………....45 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 利用專利分析研究北美地區智慧型手機企業間各種智慧財產權關係 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Patent Analysis of Various IPRs Relationships Among Smartphone Firms in the North America Region | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 101-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.coadvisor | 陳忠仁 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林博文,洪瑞章 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 智慧型手機,專利策略核,心技術領域,專利侵權訴訟,專利單向授權,專利交叉授權, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | smartphone,patent strategy,core technology fields,patent infringement lawsuit,unilateral patent license,patent cross license, | en |
dc.relation.page | 47 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2012-11-14 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-101-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 5.09 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。