Public Policy Evaluation of RAND Decisions in Apple v. Motorola, Motorola v. Microsoft, in Re Innovatio, and Ericsson v. D-Link

Tusher Center for the Management of Intellectual Capital Working Paper No. 8

37 Pages Posted: 29 Sep 2016

See all articles by David Teece

David Teece

Institute for Business Innovation

Edward Sherry

Independent

Date Written: September 28, 2016

Abstract

The recent decisions in the Apple v. Motorola, Motorola v. Microsoft, In Re Innovatio, and Ericsson v. D-Link cases have offered much-needed guidance on U.S. courts’ interpretation of what constitutes F/RAND licensing terms in the standard-setting context. In this paper, we have discussed the implications of these rulings from the perspective of economics and public policy. The courts have generally relied on modified versions of the criteria used in determining “reasonable royalty” patent infringement damages. Whereas some of these proposed modifications are sensible in our view, others are inconsistent with generally accepted economic principles and are likely to have an adverse effect on incentives to innovate.

Keywords: FRAND, RAND, Apple v. Motorola, Motorola v. Microsoft, In Re Innovatio, Ericsson v. D-Link

Suggested Citation

Teece, David J. and Sherry, Edward, Public Policy Evaluation of RAND Decisions in Apple v. Motorola, Motorola v. Microsoft, in Re Innovatio, and Ericsson v. D-Link (September 28, 2016). Tusher Center for the Management of Intellectual Capital Working Paper No. 8. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2845031 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2845031

David J. Teece (Contact Author)

Institute for Business Innovation ( email )

F402 Haas School of Business, #1930
Berkeley, CA 94720-1930
United States
(510) 642-4041 (Phone)

Edward Sherry

Independent ( email )

No Address Available

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
95
Abstract Views
393
rank
280,107
PlumX Metrics