Mixed Source

References

• Adner R., Csaszar F., Zemsky P. Positioning on a multi-attribute landscape. (2010) . Working paper, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NHCrossref, Google Scholar
• Baden-Fuller C., MacMillan I., Demil B., Lecocq X. Special issue call for papers: Business models. Long Range Planning (2008) Google Scholar
• Bagozzi R. P., Dholakia U. M. Open source software user communities: A study of participation in Linux user groups. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1099–1115Link, Google Scholar
• Baldwin C. Y., Clark K. B. The architecture of participation: Does code architecture mitigate free riding in the open source development model? Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1116–1125Link, Google Scholar
• Bessen J., Bitzer J., Schröder P. Open source software: Free provision of complex public goods. The Economics of Open Source Software Development (2006) (Elsevier, Amsterdam) 57–82Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bitzer J. Commercial versus open source software: The role of product heterogeneity in competition. Econom. Systems (2004) 28(4):369–381Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonaccorsi A., Giannangeli S., Rossi C. Entry strategies under competing standards: Hybrid business models in the open source software industry. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1085–1098Link, Google Scholar
• Brandenburger A., Nalebuff B.Co-Opetition: A Revolution Mindset That Combines Competition and Cooperation. The Game Theory Strategy That's Changing the Game of Business (1997) (Doubleday, New York) Google Scholar
• Brandenburger A., Stuart H. Value-based business strategy. J. Econom. Management Strategy (1996) 5(1):5–24Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brandenburger A., Stuart H. Biform games. Management Sci. (2007) 53(4):537–549Link, Google Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Ghemawat P. Dynamic mixed duopoly: A model motivated by Linux vs. Windows. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1072–1084Link, Google Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Hervas-Drane A. Peer-to-peer file sharing and the market for digital information goods. J. Econom. Management Strategy (2010) 19(2):333–373Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Ricart J.-E. From strategy to business model and onto tactics. Long Range Planning (2010) 43(2–3):195–215Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Yoffie D. Wintel: Cooperation and conflict. Management Sci. (2007) 53(4):584–598Link, Google Scholar
• Casadesus-Masanell R., Zhu F. Strategies to fight ad-sponsored rivals. Management Sci. (2010) 56(9):1484–1499Link, Google Scholar
• Charny B. Microsoft raps open-source approach. CNET News (2001) May 3). http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-257001.htmlGoogle Scholar
• Chatain O., Zemsky P. The horizontal scope of the firm: Organizational tradeoffs versus buyer-supplier relationships. Management Sci. (2007) 53(4):550–565Link, Google Scholar
• Chen M. K., Nalebuff B. J. One-way essential complements. (2006) . Discussion Paper 1588, Cowles Foundation, Yale University, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
• Economides N., Katsamakas E. Two-sided competition of proprietary vs. open source technology platforms and the implications for the software industry. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1057–1071Link, Google Scholar
• Fosfuri A., Giarratana M. S., Luzzi A. The penguin has entered the building: The commercialization of open source software products. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19(2):292–305Link, Google Scholar
• Gabszewicz J., Thisse J. Price competition, quality and income disparities. J. Econom. Theory (1979) 20(3):340–359Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gaudeul A. Competition between open-source and proprietary software: The (La)TeX case study. (2005) . Discussion paper, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UKGoogle Scholar
• Haruvy E., Sethi S., Zhou J. Open source development with a commercial complementary product or service. Production Oper. Management (2008) 17(1):29–43Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henkel J. The jukebox mode of innovation—A model of commercial open source development. (2004) . Discussion Paper 4507, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
• Katz M. L., Shapiro C. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1985) 75(3):424–440Google Scholar
• Kim W. C., Mauborgne R.Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant (2005) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Lee D., Mendelson H. Divide and conquer: Competing with free technology under network effects. Production Oper. Management (2008) 17(1):12–28Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner J., Tirole J. The economics of technology sharing: Open source and beyond. J. Econom. Perspect. (2005) 19(2):99–120Crossref, Google Scholar
• Letzing J. Microsoft defends right to brandish open-source patents. Market Watch (2009) July 22). http://www.marketwatch.com/story/microsoft-defends-nuanced-open-source-approachGoogle Scholar
• Llanes G., de Elejalde R. Industry equilibrium with open source and proprietary firms. (2009) . Working Paper 09-149, Harvard Business School, BostonCrossref, Google Scholar
• MacDonald G., Ryall M. How do value creation and competition determine whether a firm appropriates value? Management Sci. (2004) 50(10):1319–1333Link, Google Scholar
• Markides C. C.Game-Changing Strategies: How to Create New Market Space in Established Industries by Breaking the Rules (2008) (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco) Google Scholar
• Mustonen M. Copyleft—The economics of Linux and other open source software. Inform. Econom. Policy (2003) 15(1):99–121Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts J., Hann I., Slaughter S. Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: A longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):984–999Link, Google Scholar
• Salas-Fumás V. Modelos de Negocio y Nueva Economía Industrial. Universia Business Review (2009) (Tercer Trimestre, Madrid) 122–143Google Scholar
• Schmidtke R. Private provision of a complementary public good. (2006) . Discussion Papers in Economics 2006-20, University of Munich, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Shah S. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):1000–1014Link, Google Scholar
• Shaked A., Sutton J. Relaxing price competition through product differentiation. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1982) 49(1):3–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas G. Microsoft and mixed source software. (2008) October 22). http://www.infoworld.com/d/mobilize/microsoft-exec-touts-mixed-source-ventures-795Google Scholar
• Topkis D.Supermodularity and Complementarity (1998) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vives X.Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• von Engelhardt S. Quality competition or quality cooperation? License-type and the strategic nature of open source vs. closed source business models. (2010) . Research Paper 2010-034, University of Jena, Jena, GermanyCrossref, Google Scholar
• von Krogh G., von Hippel E. The promise of research on open source software. Management Sci. (2006) 52(7):975–983Link, Google Scholar