Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control

References

• Andreessen M (2007) The three kinds of platforms you meet on the Internet. Pmarchive (blog) (September 16), http://pmarchive.com/three_kinds_of_platforms_you_meet_on_the_internet.html.Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1996) R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86(3):630–640.Google Scholar
• Bakos Y, Brynjolfsson E (1998) Bundling information goods: Pricing, profits and efficiency. Management Sci. 45(12):1613–1630.Link, Google Scholar
• Baldwin C, Woodard J (2009) The architecture of platforms: A unified view. Gawer A, ed. Platforms, Markets and Innovation, Chapter 2 (Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK), 131–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benkler Y (2002) Coase’s penguin, or, Linux and “the nature of the firm.” Yale Law J. 112(3):369–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bessen J, Maskin E (2009) Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation. RAND J. Econom. 40(4):611–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau K (2010) Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access versus devolving control. Management Sci. 56(10):1849–1872.Link, Google Scholar
• Ceccagnoli M, Forman C, Huang P, Wu DJ (2012) Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem: The case of enterprise software. MIS Quart. Management Inform. Systems 36(1):263–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cerf V (2012) Remarks at the digital broadband migration: The dynamics of disruptive innovation: Internet speculations. J. Telecomm. High Tech. L. 10:21.Google Scholar
• Chang HF (1995) Patent scope, antitrust policy, and cumulative innovation. RAND J. Econom. 26(1):34–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough HW (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology (Harvard Business Publishing, Boston).Google Scholar
• Edwards S (2001) Openness, productivity and growth: What do we really know? Econom. J. 108(447):383–398.Google Scholar
• Eisenberg MA (1976) Private ordering through negotiation: Dispute-settlement and rulemaking. Harvard Law Rev. 89(4):637–681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenmann T, Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2009) Opening platforms: How, when and why? Gawer A, ed. Platforms, Markets and Innovation, Chap. 6 (Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, UK), 131–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenmann T, Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2011) Platform envelopment. Strategic Management J. 32(12):1270–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enkel E, Gassmann O, Chesbrough H (2009) Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management 39(4):311–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans DS, Hagiu A, Schmalensee R (2006) Invisible Engines: How Software Platforms Drive Innovation and Transform Industries (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fine CH (1999) Clockspeed: Winning Industry Control in the Age of Temporary Advantage (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Garvin J (2016) Platform wars: The battle for developers. Presentation, MIT Platform Strategy Summit, July 15, Cambridge, MA, https://evansdata.com/_download/share/MIT-Presentation_%20EDC_%20Janel%20Garvin.pdf.Google Scholar
• Gawer A, Cusumano MA (2002) Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation (Harvard Business Publishing, Boston).Google Scholar
• Gawer A, Cusumano MA (2008) How companies become platform leaders. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 49(2):28–35.Google Scholar
• Gawer A, Henderson R (2007) Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: Evidence from Intel. J. Econom. Management Strategy 16(1):1–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert R, Shapiro C (1990) Optimal patent length and breadth. RAND J. Econom. 21(1):106–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gillette F (2011) The rise and inglorious fall of MySpace. Bus. Week (June 27):52–59.Google Scholar
• Green JR, Scotchmer S (1995) On the division of profit in sequential innovation. RAND J. Econom. 26(1):20–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gurley B (2013) A rake too far: Optimal platform pricing strategy. Above the Crowd (April 18), http://abovethecrowd.com/2013/04/18/a-rake-too-far-optimal-platformpricing-strategy/.Google Scholar
• Hagiu A, Wright J (2015) Multi-sided platforms. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 43(November):162–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A (2003) How Breakthroughs Happen: The Surprising Truth About How Companies Innovate (Harvard Business Publishing, Boston).Google Scholar
• Heller MA, Eisenberg RS (1998) Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280(5364):698–701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hof R (2013) IPO filing: Twitter still losing big money even as 2012 revenues tripled. Forbes (October 3), https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2013/10/03/revealed-in-ipo-filing-twitter-still-losing-big-money-even-as-2012-revenue-tripled-to-317-million/#3ec7e529424a.Google Scholar
• Husney J (2014) Crowd tough. Contagious (February 3), http://www.contagious.com/blogs/news-and-views/12029081-opinion-crowd-tough.Google Scholar
• Jackson T (1999) United States of America, plaintiff, vs. Microsoft Corporation, defendant: Findings of fact. Civil Action 98-1232.Google Scholar
• Kent SL (2001) The Ultimate History of Video Games (Three Rivers Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Klemperer P (1990) How broad should the scope of patent protection be? RAND J. Econom. 21(1):113–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laffan L (2011) A new way of measuring openness, from Android to WebKit: The Open Governance Index. Vision Mobile (July 29), https://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2011/07/the-open-governance-index-measuring-openness-from-android-to-webkit.Google Scholar
• Landes WM, Posner RA (2003) Indefinitely renewable copyright. Univer. Chicago Law Rev. 70(2):471–518.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laursen K, Salter A (2005) Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management J. 27(2):131–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawler R (2014) Uber opens its API with 11 launch partners, including OpenTable, TripAdvisor, and United Airlines. TechCrunch (August 20), https://techcrunch.com/2014/08/20/uber-api-part-deux/.Google Scholar
• Manjoo F (2012) Pokey: Is its new chat app a sign that Facebook’s falling behind? Slate (December 27), http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2012/12/facebook_s_poke_its_snapchat_clone_is_a_bad_sign.html.Google Scholar
• McAfee RP, McMillan J, Whinston MD (1989) Multiproduct monopoly, commodity bundling, and correlation of values. Quart. J. Econom. 104(2):371–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nalebuff B (2004) Bundling as an entry barrier. Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):159–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Noe T, Parker G (2005) Winner take all: Competition, strategy, and the structure of returns in the internet economy. J. Econom. Management Strategy 14(1):141–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2000a) Information complements, substitutes, and strategic product design. Proc. 21st Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 13–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2000b) Internetwork externalities and free information goods. Proc. Second ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 107–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2005) Two-sided network effects: A theory of information product design. Management Sci. 51(10):1494–1504.Link, Google Scholar
• Parker G, Van Alstyne M (2009) Six challenges in platform licensing and open innovation. Commun. Strategies Q2(74):17–36.Google Scholar
• Partha D, David PA (1994) Toward a new economics of science. Res. Policy 23(5):487–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piskorski J, Eisenmann T, Chen D, Feinstein B (2012) Facebook’s platforms. HBS Case 9-808-128, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Rochet JC, Tirole J (2003) Platform competition in two-sided markets. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 1(4):990–1029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rusli EM, MacMillan D (2014) Uber gets an uber valuation. Wall Street Journal (June 6), https://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-gets-uber-valuation-of-18-2-billion-1402073876.Google Scholar
• Salinger MA (1995) A graphical analysis of bundling. J. Bus. 68(1):85–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schrage M (1991) Archaic patent laws need to be rewritten. Los Angeles Times (October 24), http://articles.latimes.com/1991-10-24/business/fi-436_1_intellectual-property-protection.Google Scholar
• Singh J, Fleming L (2010) Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. 56(1):41–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Tadelis S (2013) Game Theory: An Introduction (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Tee R, Woodard J (2013) Architectural control and value migration in layered ecosystems: The case of open-source cloud management platforms. Paper presented at the Vienna Conference on Strategy, Organizational Design, and Innovation, June 22, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (1988) Capturing value from technological innovation: Integration, strategic partnering, and licensing decisions. Interfaces 18(3):46–61.Link, Google Scholar
• Tirole J (1988) The Theory of Industrial Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Valloppillil V, Cohen J, Raymond ES (1998) The Halloween documents. Microsoft Corporation, http://catb.org/~esr/halloween/index.html, last accessed July 21, 2017.Google Scholar
• Wacksman B, Stutzman C (2014) Connected by Design (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Weitzman ML (1998) Recombinant growth. Quart. J. Econom. 113(2): 331–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• West J (2003) How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Res. Policy 32(7):1259–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• West J, Vanhaverbeke W, Chesbrough H (2006) Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Weyl EG (2010) A price theory of multi-sided platforms. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(4):1642–1672.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson O (2002) The lens of contract: Private ordering. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(2):438–443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Inform. Systems Res. 21(4):724–735.Link, Google Scholar