This document is available in three formats: this web page (for browsing content), PDF (comparable to original document formatting), and WordPerfect. To view the PDF you will need Acrobat Reader, which may be downloaded from the Adobe site. For an official signed copy, please contact the Antitrust Documents Group.

Return to Report

APPENDIX G

References Cited in Report

ABA Section of Antitrust Law, Antitrust Law Developments (5th ed. 2002).

Aghion, Philippe, and Patrick Bolton, Contracts as a Barrier to Entry, 77 American Econ. Rev. 388 (1987).

Andewelt, Roger B., Analysis of Patent Pools Under the Antitrust Laws, 53 Antitrust L.J. 611 (1985).

10 Areeda, Phillip E., Einer Elhauge, and Herbert Hovenkamp, Antitrust Law: An Analysis of Antitrust Principles and Their Application (2004).

3 Areeda, Phillip E., and Herbert Hovenkamp, Antitrust Law: An Analysis of Antitrust Principles and Their Application (2d ed. 2002).

Bakos, Yannis, and Eric Brynjolfsson, Bundling and Competition on the Internet, 19 Marketing Science 63 (2000).

Bakos, Yannis, and Eric Brynjolfsson, Bundling Information Goods: Prices, Profits, and Efficiency, 45 Management Science 1613 (1999).

Balto David, and Robert Pitofsky, Antitrust and High-Tech Industries: The New Challenge, 43 Antitrust Bulletin 583 (1998).

Barnett, Thomas O., Assistant Attorney Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, Letter to Robert A. Skitol, Esq., Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (Oct. 30, 2006), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/219380.pdf.

Barton, John H., Patents and Antitrust: A Rethinking in Light of Patent Breadth and Sequential Innovation, 65 Antitrust L.J. 449 (1997).

Biester, Edward G., III, An Overview of the IP-Antitrust Intersection: Reevaluating the 1995 Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property, Antitrust, Summer 2002, at 8.

Blair, Roger D., and Jeffrey L. Harrison, Monopsony: Antitrust Law and Economics (1993).

Boyle, Peter M., Penelope M. Lister, and J. Clayton Everett, Jr., Antitrust Law at the Federal Circuit: Red Light or Green Light at the IP-Antitrust Intersection?, 69 Antitrust L.J. 739 (2001).

Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, Standards and Certification: Final Staff Report (1983).

Burtis, Michelle M., and Bruce H. Kobayashi, Why an Original Can Be Better than a Copy: Intellectual Property, the Antitrust Refusal to Deal, and ISO Antitrust Litigation, 9 Supreme Court Econ. Rev. 143 (2001).

Carlson, Steven C., Patent Pools and the Antitrust Dilemma, 16 Yale J. on Regulation 359 (1999).

Carlton, Dennis W., and J. Mark Klamer, The Need for Coordination Among Firms, with Special Reference to Network Industries, 50 University of Chicago L. Rev. 446 (1983).

Carlton, Dennis W., and Jeffrey M. Perloff, Modern Industrial Organization (4th ed. 2005).

Carrier, Michael A., Why Antitrust Should Defer to the Intellectual Property Rules of Standard-Setting Organizations: A Commentary on Teece & Sherry, 87 Minnesota L. Rev. 2019 (2003).

Center for the New Europe, Edited Transcript of a CNE Market Insights Event: Tying and Bundling: From Economics to Competition Policy (Sept. 19, 2002), http://www.cne.org/pub_pdf/2002_09_19_tying_bundling.htm.

Church, Jeffrey, and Neil Gandal, Network Effects, Software Provision, and Standardization, 40 J. of Industrial Econ. 85 (1992).

Church, Jeffrey, and Roger Ware, Network Industries, Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy, in Competition Policy and Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy 230-39 (Robert D. Anderson & Nancy T. Gallini eds., 1998).

Clark, Jeanne, Joe Piccolo, Brian Stanton, and Karin Tyson, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Patent Pools: A Solution to the Problem of Access in Biotechnology Patents? (2000), available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/dapp/opla/patentpool.pdf.

Commission Notice (EC), Guidelines on the Application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to Technology Transfer Agreements, 2004 O.J. (C 101) 2 , available at http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2004/c_101/c_10120040427en00020042.pdf.

Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic & Protein Research & Innovation, National Academies, Reaping the Benefits of Genomic and Proteomic Research: Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, and Public Health (Stephen A. Merrill & Anne-Marie Mazza eds., 2006).

Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Econ., National Academies, A Patent System for the 21st Century (Stephen A. Merrill et al. eds., 2004).

Competition Bureau, Government of Canada, Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (2000), available at http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/ct/ipege.pdf.

Competition Commission of Singapore, Guidelines on the Treatment of Intellectual Property Rights (2005), available at http://www.ccs.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/A67B68FC-DB6F-415B-9DF1-5A97FC6855A9/6714/CCSGuidelineonIPR20051228websitefinal2.pdf.

Cournot, Augustin, Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth (1929).

Donovan, Richard E., Antitrust Issues in Licensing, in Advanced Licensing Agreements for the New Economy 2001, at 643 (2001).

Easterbrook, Frank H., Intellectual Property is Still Property, 13 Harvard J.L. & Public Policy 108 (1990).

Economides, Nicholas, The Economics of Networks, 14 International J. of Industrial Organization 673 (1996).

Evans David, and Michael Salinger, Why Do Firms Bundle and Tie? Evidence from Competitive Markets and Implications for Tying Law, 22 Yale J. on Regulation 37 (2005).

Farrell, Joseph, and Garth Saloner, Converters, Compatibility and the Control of Interfaces, 40 J. of Industrial Econ. 9 (1992).

Farrell, Joseph, and Garth Saloner, Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation, 76 American Econ. Rev. 940 (1986).

Federal Trade Commission, To Promote Innovation: The Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy (2003), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/10/innovationrpt.pdf.

Federal Trade Commission, Entering the 21st Century: Competition Policy in the World of B2B Electronic Marketplaces (2000), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/10/b2breport.pdf.

Feldman, Robin C., The Insufficiency of Antitrust Analysis for Patent Misuse, 55 Hastings L.J. 399 (2003).

Franzinger, Michael R., Latent Dangers in a Patent Pool: The European Commission's Approval of the 3G Wireless Technology Licensing Agreements, 91 California L. Rev. 1693 (2003).

Gilbert, Richard J., Antitrust for Patent Pools: A Century of Policy Evolution, 2004 Stanford Technology L. Rev. 3 (2004), http://stlr.stanford.edu/STLR/Articles/04_STLR_3/index.htm.

Gilbert, Richard, Symposium on Compatibility: Incentives and Market Structure, 40 J. of Industrial Econ. 1 (1992).

Gilbert, Richard, and Carl Shapiro, Antitrust Issues in the Licensing of Intellectual Property: The Nine No-No's Meet the Nineties, 1997 Brookings Papers on Econ. Activity, Microeconomics 283.

Gordon, George G., and James P. Denvir, III, Is There Life After a Patent?: Strategies to Maximize the Value of Product Life-Cycles After a Patent Expires, Presentation Before the American Bar Association, Antitrust Section 281-84 (May 3-4, 2001) (on file with the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission).

Grimes, Warren S., The Antitrust Tying Law Schism: A Critique of Microsoft III and a Response to Hylton and Salinger, 70 Antitrust L.J. 199 (2002).

Grindley, Peter C., and David J. Teece, Managing Intellectual Capital: Licensing and Cross-Licensing in Semiconductors and Electronics, California Management Rev., Winter 1997, at 8.

Grossman, Sanford J., and Oliver D. Hart, The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration, 94 J. of Political Econ. 691 (1986).

Guidelines on the Application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to Technology Transfer Agreements (EC), 2004 O.J. (C 101) 2 , available at http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2004/c_101/c_10120040427en00020042.pdf.

Heller, Michael A., and Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, 280 Science 698 (1998).

Hovenkamp, Herbert, IP Ties and Microsoft Rule of Reason, 47 Antitrust Bulletin 369 (2002).

1 Hovenkamp, Herbert, Mark D. Janis, and Mark A. Lemley, IP and Antitrust: An Analysis of Antitrust Principles Applied to Intellectual Property Law (2002).

12 Hovenkamp, Herbert, Antitrust Law (1999).

Hovenkamp, Herbert, Mark D. Janis, and Mark A. Lemley, Unilateral Refusals to License, 2 J. of Competition L. & Econ. 1 (2006).

James, Charles A., Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Letter to Ky P. Ewing, Esq. (Nov. 12, 2002), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/200455.pdf.

Japan Fair Trade Commission, Guidelines for Patent and Know-How Licensing Agreements Under the Antimonopoly Act (1999), available at http://www.jftc.go.jp/e-page/legislation/ama/patentandknow-how.pdf.

Katz, Michael L., and Carl Shapiro, Systems Competition and Network Effects, J. of Econ. Perspectives, Spring 1994, at 93.

Katz, Michael L., and Carl Shapiro, Product Introduction with Network Externalities, 40 J. of Industrial Econ. 55 (1992).

Katz, Michael L., and Carl Shapiro, Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities, 94 J. of Political Econ. 822 (1986).

Katz, Michael L., and Carl Shapiro, On the Licensing of Innovations, 16 RAND J. of Econ. 504 (1985).

Klein, Benjamin, Market Power in Franchise Cases in the Wake of Kodak: Applying Post Contract Hold-Up Analysis to Vertical Relationships, 67 Antitrust L.J. 283 (1999).

Klein, Benjamin, Robert G. Crawford, and Armen A. Alchian, Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process, 21 J.L. & Econ. 297 (1978).

Klein Benjamin, and John Shepard Wiley Jr., Competitive Price Discrimination as an Antitrust Justification for Intellectual Property Refusals to Deal, 70 Antitrust L.J. 599 (2003).

Klein, Joel I., Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Letter to Carey R. Ramos, Esq. (June 10, 1999), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/2485.pdf.

Klein, Joel I., Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Letter to Garrard R. Beeney, Esq. (Dec. 16, 1998), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/2121.pdf.

Klein, Joel I., Acting Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Letter to G[a]rrard R. Beeney, Esq. (June 26, 1997), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/215742.pdf.

Klein, Joel I., Acting Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Cross-Licensing and Antitrust Law, Address Before the American Intellectual Property Law Association (May 2, 1997), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/1118.pdf.

Kolasky, William J., GE/Honeywell: Continuing the Transatlantic Dialogue, 23 University of Pennsylvania. J. of International Econ. L. 513 (2002).

Korea Fair Trade Commission, Guidelines of Reviewing Undue Exercise of Intellectual Property Rights (2000), available at http://ftc.go.kr/data/hwp/irp_guidelines.doc.

Law, Stephen M., Inter-temporal Tie-ins: A Case for Tying Intellectual Property Through Licensing, 11 International J. of the Econ. of Business 3 (2004).

Lemley, Mark A., Intellectual Property Rights and Standard-Setting Organizations, 90 California L. Rev. 1889 (2002).

Lerner, Josh, and Jean Tirole, Efficient Patent Pools, 94 American Econ. Rev. 691 (2004).

Levin, Richard C., Alvin K. Klevorick, Richard R. Nelson, and Sidney G. Winter, Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development, 1987 Brookings Papers on Econ. Activity 783.

Levine, Gail F., B2Bs, E-Commerce & the All-Or-Nothing Deal, 28 Rutgers Computer & Technology L.J. 383 (2002).

Licensing Settlement Ends Patent Suit by Rambus, N.Y. Times, Mar. 22, 2005, at C15.

Lipsky, Abbott B., Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Current Antitrust Division Views on Patent Licensing Practices, Remarks Before the American Bar Association Antitrust Section (Nov. 5, 1981), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 13,129.

Majewski, Suzanne E., and Dean V. Williamson, Incomplete Contracting and the Structure of R&D Joint Venture Contracts, in 15 Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Growth: Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship 201 (Gary D. Libecap ed., 2004).

Majoras, Deborah Platt, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission, Recognizing the Procompetitive Potential of Royalty Discussions in Standard Setting, Remarks at Standardization and the Law: Developing the Golden Mean for Global Trade (Sept. 23, 2005), available at http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/majoras/050923stanford.pdf.

Mansfield, Edwin, How Rapidly Does New Industrial Technology Leak Out?, 34 J. of Industrial Econ. 217 (1985).

Masoudi, Gerald F., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Intellectual Property and Competition: Four Principles for Encouraging Innovation, Address Before the Digital Americas 2006 Meeting (April 11, 2006), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/215645.pdf.

1 McCarthy, J. Thomas, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition (4th ed. 2005).

McCullen, Sharon Brawner, The Federal Circuit and Ninth Circuit Face-Off: Does a Patent Holder Violate the Sherman Act by Unilaterally Excluding Others from a Patented Invention in More than One Relevant Market?, 74 Temple L. Rev. 469 (2001).

Melamed, A. Douglas, and Ali M. Stoeppelwerth, The CSU Case: Facts, Formalism and the Intersection of Antitrust and Intellectual Property Law, 10 George Mason L. Rev. 407 (2002).

Merges, Robert P., Institutions for Intellectual Property Transactions: The Case of Patent Pools, in Expanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property: Innovation Policy for the Knowledge Society 123 (Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss et al. eds., 2000), available at http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/pubs/merges/pools.pdf.

Merges, Robert P., Contracting into Liability Rules: Intellectual Property Rights and Collective Rights Organizations, 84 California L. Rev. 1293 (1996).

Mueller, Janice M., Patent Misuse Through the Capture of Industry Standards, 17 Berkeley Technology L.J. 623 (2002).

Mueller, Janice M., No "Dilettante Affair": Rethinking the Experimental Use Exception to Patent Infringement for Biomedical Research Tools, 76 Washington L. Rev. 1 (2001).

Muris, Timothy J., The FTC and the Law of Monopolization, 67 Antitrust L.J. 693 (2000).

Nielsen, Jane, Reach-Through Rights in Biomedical Patent Licensing: A Comparative Analysis of Their Anticompetitive Reach, 32 Federal L. Rev. 169 (2004).

Newberg, Joshua A., Antitrust, Patent Pools and the Management of Uncertainty, 3 Atlantic L.J. 1 (2000), available at http://www.ftc.gov/opp/intellect/020417joshuanewberg.pdf.

Ordover, Janusz A., A Patent System for Both Diffusion and Exclusion, J. Econ. Perspectives, Winter 1991, at 43.

Organisation for Econ. Co-operation & Development, Genetic Inventions, Intellectual Property Rights and Licensing Practices: Evidence and Polices (2002).

Oversight of Enforcement of the Antitrust Laws Before the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Business Rights, and Competition of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 107th Congress 134 (2002) (statement of the Federal Trade Commission), available at http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/03jul20031230/www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/107hrg/87867.pdf.

Pate, R. Hewitt, Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Competition and Intellectual Property in the U.S.: Licensing Freedom and the Limits of Antitrust, Address Before the 2005 EU Competition Workshop (June 3, 2005), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/209359.pdf.

Pate, R. Hewitt, Acting Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust and Intellectual Property, Remarks at the American Intellectual Property Law Association 2003 Mid-Winter Institute (Jan. 24, 2003), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/200701.pdf.

Pate, R. Hewitt, Refusals to Deal and Intellectual Property Rights, 10 George Mason L. Rev. 429 (2002).

Patterson, Mark R., Inventions, Industry Standards, and Intellectual Property, 17 Berkeley Technology L.J. 1043 (2002).

Posner, Richard A., Antitrust in the New Economy, 68 Antitrust L.J. 925 (2001).

Principles and Guidelines for Recipients of NIH Research Grants and Contracts on Obtaining and Disseminating Biomedical Research Resources, 64 Fed. Reg. 72,090, 72,091 (Dec. 23, 1999), available at http://ott.od.nih.gov/pdfs/64FR72090.pdf.

Quélin, Bertrand V., Tamym Abdessemed, Jean-Philippe Bonardi, and Rodolphe Durand, Standardisation of Network Technologies: Market Processes or the Result of Inter-firm Co-operation?, 15 J. Econ. Surveys 543 (2001).

Rasmusen, Eric B., J. Mark Ramseyer, and John S. Wiley, Jr., Naked Exclusion, 81 American Econ. Rev. 1137 (1991).

Scotchmer, Suzanne, Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law, J. of Econ. Perspectives, Winter 1991, at 29.

Segal, Ilya R., and Michael D. Whinston, Naked Exclusion: Comment, 90 American Econ. Rev. 296 (2000).

Shapiro, Carl, Competition Policy and Innovation (Organisation for Econ. Co-operation and Development, STI Working Paper No. 2002/11, 2002), available at http://www.ftc.gov/opp/intellect/020501carlshapiro.pdf.

Shapiro, Carl, Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting, in 1 Innovation Policy and the Economy 119 (Adam B. Jaffe et al. eds., 2000).

Shapiro, Carl, and Hal R. Varian, The Art of Standards War, California Management Rev., Winter 1999, at 8.

Shapiro, Carl, and Hal R. Varian, Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy (1999).

Simmons, Ian, Patrick Lynch, and Theodore H. Frank, "I Know It When I See It": Defining and Demonstrating "Blocking Patents," Antitrust, Summer 2002, at 48.

Simpson, John, and Abraham Wickelgren, The Use of Exclusive Contracts to Deter Entry (Bureau of Econ., Federal Trade Commission, Working Paper No. 241, 2001), available at http://www.ftc.gov/be/workpapers/wp241.pdf.

Skitol, Robert A., Concerted Buying Power: Its Potential for Addressing the Patent Holdup Problem in Standard Setting, 72 Antitrust L.J. 727 (2005).

Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, Pub. L. No. 105-298, 112 Stat. 2827 (1998).

Spengler, Joseph J., Vertical Integration and Antitrust Policy, 58 J. of Political Econ. 347 (1950).

Standards-Setting and United States Competitiveness: Hearing Before the House Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards of the House Committee on Science, 107th Congress (2001).

Statement of the Federal Trade Commission: In the Matter of Union Oil Company of California, Dkt. No. 9305 and Chevron/Unocal, File No. 051-0125 (June 10, 2005), available at www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9305/050802statement.pdf.

Steinman, David R., and Danielle S. Fitzpatrick, Antitrust Counterclaims in Patent Infringement Cases: A Guide to Walker Process and Sham-Litigation Claims, 10 Texas Intellectual Property L.J. 95 (2001).

Swanson, Daniel G., and William J. Baumol, Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory (RAND) Royalties, Standards Selection, and Control of Market Power, 73 Antitrust L.J. 1 (2005).

Taiwan Fair Trade Commission, Rules for Review of Technology Licensing Arrangement Cases, available at http://www.globalcompetitionforum.org/regions/asia/Taipei/Technology%20Licensing.pdf.

Tassey, Gregory, Standardization in Technology-Based Markets, 29 Research Policy 587 (2000).

Teece, David J., Managing Intellectual Capital: Organizational, Strategic, and Policy Dimensions (2002).

Teece, David J., Peter Grindley, and Edward Sherry, Understanding the Licensing Option, in Managing Intellectual Capital 135 (2000).

Teece David J., and Edward F. Sherry, Standards Setting and Antitrust, 87 Minnesota L. Rev. 1913 (2003).

U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division Policy Guide to Merger Remedies (2004), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) 13,171, available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/205108.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division Manual (3d ed. 1998, rev. 2002), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/foia/divisionmanual/three.htm.

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines (2006), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/215247.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors (2000), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 13,161, available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/04/ftcdojguidelines.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Horizontal Merger Guidelines (1992, rev. ed. 1997), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) 13,104, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/hmg.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy in Health Care (1996), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 13,153, at 20,812-14, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/1791.pdf.

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission, Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (1995), reprinted in 4 Trade Reg. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 13,132, available at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/0558.pdf.

Varian, Hal R., Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach (4th ed. 1992).

Williamson, Oliver E., The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting (1985).

Wilson, Bruce B., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Patent and Know-How License Agreements: Field of Use, Territorial, Price and Quantity Restrictions, Remarks Before the Fourth New England Antitrust Conference (Nov. 6, 1970), reprinted in Antitrust Primer: Patents, Franchising, Treble Damage Suits 11.

World Wide Web Consortium, Press Release, World Wide Web Consortium Approves Patent Policy (May 21, 2003), http://www.w3.org/2003/05/patentpolicy-pressrelease.html.en.

Worley, Regis C., The MPEG LA Patent Pool: A Rule of Reason Analysis and Suggestion to Improve Procompetitiveness, 24 Thomas Jefferson L. Rev. 299 (2002).