path: root/data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst
diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst')
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst b/data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst
index 83cb392..edde8a3 100644
--- a/data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst
+++ b/data/samples/current/en/democratizing_innovation.eric_von_hippel.sst
@@ -111,7 +111,8 @@ Then I remembered the "Chip," a small experimental board we had built with foots
The whole sport of high-performance windsurfing really started from that. As soon as I did it, there were about ten of us who sailed all the time together and within one or two days there were various boards out there that had footstraps of various kinds on them, and we were all going fast and jumping waves and stuff. It just kind of snowballed from there. (Shah 2000)
={ Shah, S. ;
- windsurfing +1 }
+ windsurfing +1
By 1998, more than a million people were engaged in windsurfing, and a large fraction of the boards sold incorporated the user-developed innovations for the high-performance sport.
@@ -2043,7 +2044,8 @@ By freely revealing information about an innovative product or process, a user m
A variation of this argument applies to the free revealing among competing manufacturers documented by Henkel (2003). Competing developers of embedded Linux systems were creating software that was specifically designed to run the hardware products of their specific clients. Each manufacturer could freely reveal this equipment-specific code without fear of direct competitive repercussions: it was applicable mainly to specific products made by a manufacturer's client, and it was less valuable to others. At the same time, all would jointly benefit from free revealing of improvements to the underlying embedded Linux code base, upon which they all build their proprietary products. After all, the competitive advantages of all their products depended on this code base's being equal to or better than the proprietary software code used by other manufacturers of similar products. Additionally, Linux software was a complement to hardware that many of the manufacturers in Henkel's sample also sold. Improved Linux software would likely increase sales of their complementary hardware products. (Complement suppliers' incentives to innovate have been modeled by Harhoff (1996).)
={ Linux ;
- Henkel, J. }
+ Henkel, J.
!_ Free Revealing and Reuse
={ Free revealing of innovation information +2 }
@@ -2697,7 +2699,7 @@ Interesting examples also exist regarding on the impact a commons can have on th
Linux ;
Weber, S. ;
Intellectual property rights :
- licensing of +1 ;
+ licensing of +1
Similar actions can keep conditions for free access to materials held within a commons from degrading and being lost over time. Chris Hanson, a Principal Research Scientist at MIT, illustrates this with an anecdote regarding an open source software component called ipfilter. The author of ipfilter attempted to "lock" the program by changing licensing terms of his program to disallow the distribution of modified versions. His reasoning was that Ipfilter, a network-security filter, must be as bug-free as possible, and that this could best be ensured by his controlling access. His actions ignited a flame war in which the author was generally argued to be selfish and overreaching. His program, then an essential piece of BSD operating systems, was replaced by newly written code in some systems within the year. The author, Hanson notes, has since changed his licensing terms back to a standard BSD-style (unrestricted) license.