Preliminary Literature etc. (pensum)
|
Reading material (some changes and amendments to the list
should be expected)
Jens Schovsbo and Morten Rosenmeier: Immaterialret, DJØF
Forlag 2013. (or an equivalent book in English,
e.g. Intellectual property law Bently, Lionel and Sherman,
Brad, 4 ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014
Arrow, Kenneth (1973). Information and Economic Behavior
(Stockholm: Federation of Swedish Industries), s. 5-25.
Maskus, Keith E (2000). ”Globalization and the economics of
intellectual property rights: dancing the dual distortion,”
Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy (Washington,
D.C., Institute for International Economics).
Greenhalgh, C. and Rogers, M. (2010). Innovation, Intellectual
Property and Economic Growth (Princeton and Oxford, Princeton
University Press, s. 149-73.
Are Stenvik: ”Protection for Equivalents Under Patent Law –
Theories and Practice”, IIC 2001.1-20.
Formstein, Bundesgerichtshofs dom af 29.4.1986, IIC 1987.795-805.
Mazzoleni, Roberto and Nelson, Richard R. (1998). “Economic
theories about the benefits and costs of patents,” Journal of
Economic Issues, Vol. 32, No. 4, December, s. 1031-1051.
Rivette, K.G. and Kline, D. (2000). Discovering new value in
intellectual property, Harvard Business Review, January-February,
s. 54-66.
Cusumano, Michael A. (2013). Technology strategy and management:
The Apple-Samsung lawsuits. Communications of the ACM, January, 56
(1), s. 28-31.
Kur, Annette and Schovsbo, Jens, Expropriation or Fair Game for
All? The Gradual Dismantling of the IP Exclusivity Paradigm
(November 1, 2009). Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property,
Competition & Tax Law Research Paper No. 09-14.
Shapiro, Carl (2001). “Navigating the patent thicket:
Cross-licenses, patent pools, and standard setting,” Chapter 4 in
Jaffe, A.B., Lerner, J. and Stern, S., eds., Innovation Policy and
the Economy, Vol. 1. January, s. 119-144.
Davis, Lee (2008): Licensing strategies of the new intellectual
property vendors, California Management Review. Winter 2008
(February), pp. 6-26.
Lars Kjøelbye and Luc Peeperkorn: The New
Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation
and Guidelines s. 161 et seq, in European competition law annual
2005, The interaction between competition law and intellectual
property law
Ehlermann, Claus-Dieter; Atanasiu, Isabela;
Oxford;Hart Publishing ; 2007
Carlson, Steven, 'Patent Pools and the Antitrust Dilemma',
(1999) 16 Yale Journal of Regulation 359.
Oxley, J.E. (1999). Institutional environment and the mechanism of
governance: The impact of intellectual property protection on the
structure of interfirm alliances, Journal of Economic Behavior and
Organization, 38(3): 283-307.
Sampson, R.C. (2003). The role of lawyers in strategic
alliances, Case Western Reserve Law Review 53(4): 909-924
Vonortas, N.S. (2000). Multimarket contact and interfirm
cooperation in R&D, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10:
243-269.
Marcus Glader Open Standards: Public Policy Aspects and Competition
Law Requirements, European Competition Journal, Volume 6, Number 3,
December 2010, s 611 ff.
Shapiro, Carl and Varian, Hal R. (1999). “Rights management,”
Chapter 4 i Information Rules (Cambridge, Harvard Business School
Press), s. 83-102.
Lerner, Josh and Tirole, Jean (2005). “The economics of technology
sharing: Open source and beyond,” Journal of Economic Perspectives
19 (2), spring, s.99-118.
WIPO Recommendation Concerning Provisions on the Protection of
Well-Known Marks.
Landes, William M. and Posner, Richard A. (1987). ”Trademark law:
an economic perspective,” The Journal of Law and Economics, Vol.
30, October, s. 265-280.
Ramello, Giovanni B. (2006). ”What’s in a sign? Trademark law and
economic theory,” Journal of Economic Surveys, 20 (4), s. 547-61.
Lemley, Mark A. (1999). The modern Lanham Act and the death of
common sense. Yale Law Journal, May, v 108. Reprint (11 sider).
Mulcahy, B.R. and Grubb, L. (2009). Bienvenu sur eBay – Online
auctions for counterfeit luxury goods carry different risks in
different jurisdictions (September 15). 4 sider
Case No. KZR 40/02 (“Tight-Head Drum” (Standard-Spundfass),
Cf. IIC 2005, 741.
Eisenberg, Rebecca S. (2001). ”Bargaining over the transfer of
proprietary research tools: is this market failing or emerging?” in
Dreyfuss, Rochelle C., Zimmerman, Diane L., and First, Harry,
Expanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property (Oxford: Oxford
University press), s. 223-249.
Walsh, John P., Arora, Ashish and Cohen, Wesley M. (2003) Research
Tool Patenting and Licensing and Biomedical Innovation, in Cohen,
W.M. and Merrill, eds., Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy
(Washington, D.C. National Academies Press), s. 285-336.
Heller, M. (2008). Gridlock Economy. How Too Much Ownership
Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives (New York: Basic
Books). s. xiii-xvii, 1-6.
Gervase, d.J. (2009). (Re)implementing the Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights to Foster
Innovation,” The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 12 (5),
348-370.
“Prizes for technological innovation” (2006). The Brookings
Institution, December, s. 1-7.
“The PC all over again?” (2012). The Economist, December 1st, s. 9.
-
eBay
Inc v. MercExchange,
L.L.C.,http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-130.pdf
Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) May 6, 2009
- Case No. KZR 39/06 (“Orange.Book-Standard”),
http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/wp-content/uploads/EN-Translation-BGH-Orange-Book-Standard-eng.pdf |
|