Referenties boek
ICT en recht

Op deze pagina vind je de referenties van hoofdstuk 7 van het boek ICT & Recht, van auteur Arnoud Engelfriet. 

Meer info en aanschaffen

Referenties hoofdstuk 7
Innovatie leidt en de wet volgt   

1.    J. Dewey & M. Rogers, The public and its problems. An essay in political inquiry, Pennsylvania: Penn State Press 2012 (1927), p. 141.
2.    Geciteerd in L.L. Schramm, Technological innovation. An introduction, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. (2017).
3.    B. Godin, B, Technological Innovation: On the Origins and Development of an Inclusive Concept, Technology and Culture 2016, 57, 3, p. 527-556. 
4.    B. Godin, Innovation contested. The idea of innovation over the centuries, Londen: Routledge 2015.
5.    C. Freeman, The Economics of Industrial Innovation, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books 1974.
6.    L.C. Palm, ‘Review of K. Boersma, Inventing structures for industrial research. A history of the Philips NatLab 1914-1946’, Bijdragen en mededelingen betreffende de geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 2005, 120, p. 152-153. 
7.    J. Gertner, The idea factory. Bell Labs and the great age of American innovation, New York; The Penguin Press 2012.
8.    M. Diaconu, ‘Technological Innovation: Concept, Process, Typology and Implications in the Economy’, Theoretical & Applied Economics 2011, 18(10).
9.    J. Wasko, Hollywood in the Information Age. Beyond the Silver Screen, Cambridge: Polity 1994.
10.    K. Mulder, ‘Innovation processes’, in: K. Mulder (red.), Sustainable development for engineers, Londen: Routledge 2006, p. 219-250.
11.    J.A. Schumpeter, Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company 1939.
12.    M. Kuznetsov, A. Gorovoy & D. Rodionov, ‘Web Innovation Cycles and Timing Projections–Applying Economic Waves Theory to Internet Development Stages’, in: Innovations in Digital Economy: Third International Scientific Conference, Cham: Springer International Publishing 2022.
13.    L. Nefiodow & S. Nefiodow, ‘The Sixth Kondratieff. The Growth Engine of the 21 st Century’, in: L. Grinin, T. Devezas & A. Korotayev (red.), Kondratieff Waves, Publishing House 2012, p. 326-353. 
14.    R.N. Foster, ‘Working the S-curve: assessing technological threats’, Research Management 1986, 29(4), p. 17-20.
15.    E. Screpanti & S. Zamagni, An Outline of the History of Economic Thought, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005.
16.    D. Šmihula, ‘Waves of technological innovations and the end of the information revolution’, Journal of Economics and International Finance 2010, 2(4), 58-67.
17.    C. Adams & S. Mouatt, ‘The information revolution: information systems and the 6th Kondratieff cycle’, MCIS 2010 Proceedings.
18.    L. Grinin, A. Grinin, & A. Korotayev, ‘COVID-19 pandemic as a trigger for the acceleration of the cybernetic revolution, transition from e-government to e-state, and change in social relations’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2022, 175.
19.    G. Silva & L.C. Di Serio, ‘The sixth wave of innovation: Are we ready?’, RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação 2016, 13(2), p. 128-134.
20.    G. Modelski, ‘Kondratieff (K-) waves in the modern world system’, in: L. Grinin, T. Devezas & A. Korotayev (red.), Kondratieff waves. Dimensions and prospects at the dawn of the 21st century, Publishing House 2012, p. 65-76. 
21.    C. Freeman & F. Louçã, As time goes by: from the industrial revolutions to the information revolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2001.
22.    B.A. Schuelke-Leech, ‘A model for understanding the orders of magnitude of disruptive technologies’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2018, 129, p. 261-274.
23.    T. F. Bresnaha & M. Trajtenberg, ‘General purpose technologies ‘Engines of growth’?’, Journal of Econometrics 1995, 65, 1, p. 83-108,
24.    A. Nuvolari, ‘Understanding successive industrial revolutions: A “development block” approach’, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2019, 32, p. 33-44.
25.    D.C. Lippoldt & S. Piotr, Innovation in the Software Wector, OECD Publishing 2009.
26.    R.G. Lipsey, K.I. Carlaw & C.T. Bekar, Economic transformations: general purpose technologies and long-term economic growth, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005.
27.    S. Greenstein, ‘Innovative Conduct in Computing and Internet Markets’, in: B. H. Hall & N. Rosenberg (red.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier 2010, p. 477-537.
28.    M. Coccia & J. Watts, ‘A theory of the evolution of technology: Technological parasitism and the implications for innovation magement’, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 2020, 55, 101552.
29.    D. Cetindamar & R. Phaal, ‘Technology Management in the Age of Digital Technologies’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 2021, p. 1-9. 
30.    F. Hacklin, V. Raurich & C. Marxt. ‘How incremental innovation becomes disruptive: the case of technology convergence’, IEEE International Engineering Management Conference 2004, 1.
31.    D. Jacobsen, G. Brail & D. Woods, APIs: A Strategy Guide, Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media 2011. 
32.    O. Borgogno & G. Colangelo, ‘Data sharing and interoperability: Fostering innovation and competition through APIs’, Computer Law & Security Review 2009, 35(5), 105314.
33.    O. Hanseth, E. Monteiro & M. Hatling, 1996. ‘Developing Information Infrastructure: The Tension Between Standardization and Flexibility’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21(4), p. 407-426.
34.    J. Kopecký, P. Fremantle & R. Boakes, ‘A history and future of Web APIs’, it-Information Technology 2014, 56(3), p. 90-97.
35.    M. Zachariadisn& P. Ozcan, ‘The API economy and digital transformation in financial services: The case of open banking’, Swift Institute Working Paper 2016, 001.
36.    O. Borgogno & G. Colangelo, ‘Data sharing and interoperability: Fostering innovation and competition through APIs’, Computer Law & Security Review 2019, 35(5). 
37.    P.H. Salus, A Quarter Century of UNIX, Boston: Addison Wesley Publishing 1994,.
38.    Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (Verenigde Staten), 15 oktober 2007, Novell Inc v. Microsoft Corp, Nos 06-1134, 06-1238. 
39.    GvEA EG 17 september 2007, nr. T-201/04 (Microsoft t. Commissie EG). Bevestigd in: HvJ EU 21 juni 2012 ECLI:EU:T:2012:323 (Microsoft y. Commissie EG).
40.    HvJ EU 6 april 1995, ECLI:EU:C:1995:98. 
41.    HvJ EU 29 april 2004, ECLI:EU:C:2004:257.  
42.    Zie ook S. van Loon, Licentieweigering als misbruik van machtspositie. Intellectuele eigendom, artikel 82 EG en de belemmering van innovatie, Amsterdam: deLex 2015. 
43.    M.L. Lee & J. Davis, ‘Evolution of Open Source Software: A Study of the Samba Project’, Systèmes d'Information et Management 2003, 8(1), p. 43-62.
44.    E.S. Raymond, ‘Basics of the Unix Philosophy’, in: E.S. Raymond, The Art of Unix Programming, Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional 2003. 
45.    M. Hilbert & P. López, ‘The World’s Technological Capacity to Store, Communicate, and Compute Information’, Science 2011, 332(6025), p. 60-65.
46.    J. Allison, ‘A tale of two standards’, in: C. DiBona, D. Cooper & M. Stone (red.), Open Sources 2.0: The Continuing Evolution, Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media 2005.
47.    O. Borgogno & G. Colangelo, ‘Data sharing and interoperability: Fostering innovation and competition through APIs’, Computer Law & Security Review 2019, 35(5), 105314. Zie ook C. Riley, ‘Unpacking interoperability in competition’, Journal of Cyber Policy 2020, 5(1), p. 94-106.
48.    D. Cerri & A. Fuggetta, ‘Open standards, open formats, and open source’, Journal of systems and software 2007, 80(11), p. 1930-1937.
49.    T. Berners‐Lee e.a., (‘World‐Wide Web: The Information Universe’, Internet Research 1992, 2, 1, p. 52-58.
50.    J. Friedrich, ‘Making innovation happen: the role of standards and openness in an innovation-friendly ecosystem’, 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (SIIT) 2011, p. 1-8.
51.    J.L. Contreras, ‘Essentiality and standards-essential patents’, Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law-Antitrust, Competition and Patent Law, University of Utah College of Law Research Paper 2017, 207.
52.    J.V. Nickerson & M. zur Muehlen, ‘The ecology of standards processes: insights from internet standard making’, Mis Quarterly 2006, p. 467-488.
53.    A.L. Russell, ‘The W3C and its Patent Policy Controversy: A Case Study of Authority and Legitimacy in Internet Governance’, TPRC 2003.
54.    D.J. Weitzner, ‘Standards, patents and the dynamics of innovation on the world wide web’, Technical Report, MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory 2004.
55.    S. Jain e.a., Social movements and institutional entrepreneurship as facilitators of technology transition: the case of free/open-source software’, Research Policy 2022, 52(2), 104672.
56.    S. Williams & R. Stallman, Free as in Freedom, Scotts Valley: Createspace 2015. 
57.    S. Williams, Free as in Freedom. Richard Stallman’s Crusade for Free Software, Scotts Valley: CreateSpace 2009. 
58.    P.H. Salus, A Quarter Century of UNIX, Boston: Addison Wesley Publishing 1994, p. 142.   
59.    J.H. Saltzer, ‘The origin of the “MIT license”’, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 42.4 2020, p. 94-98.
60.    K. Koelman, ‘Terug naar de bron: open source en copyleft’, Informatierecht/AMI 2000-8, p. 149-155; H. de Preter & C. Dekeyser, ‘De totstandkoming en draagwijdte van open source-licenties’, Computerrecht 2004, 33, p. 216-220.
61.    B.W. Carver, ‘Share and share alike: Understanding and enforcing open source and free software licenses’, Berkeley Technology Law Journal 2005, 20, 443.
62.    E.A. Raymond, ‘A Brief History of Hackerdom’, in: C. DiBona, D. Cooper & M. Stone (red.), Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media 1999.
63.    N. Takahashi & T, Takamatsu, ‘UNIX license makes Linux the last major piece of the puzzle’, Annals of Business Administrative Science 2013, 12(3), p. 123-137.
64.    C. DiBona, S. Ockman & M. Stone, Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media 1999. 
65.    J. Lerner & J. Tirole, ‘The economics of technology sharing: Open source and beyond’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 2005, 19(2), p. 99-120.
66.    Supreme Court of the United States (Verenigde Staten) 3 maart 1981, Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175. 
67.    R.B. Bakels, ‘Softwareoctrooien: een vanzelfsprekendheid of een gevaarlijke ontaarding?’, Computerrecht 2002/6, p. 347; Zie ook D.J.B. Bosscher, ‘Kritiek op softwareoctrooien: ontaarding van een vanzelfsprekendheid?’, Computerrecht 2003/2, p. 141.
68.    R. Dykhuis, ‘Compression with Stacker and DoubleSpace’, Computers in Libraries 1993, 13(5), p. 27-29.
69.    J. Lerner & F. Zhu, ‘What is the impact of software patent shifts? Evidence from Lotus v. Borland’, International Journal of Industrial Organization 2007, 25/3, p. 511-529.
70.    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Verenigde Staten) 23 juli 1998, State Street Bank and Trust Company v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368.
71.    M.J. Meurer, ‘Business method patents and patent floods’, Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 2002, 8, p. 309-339; B.H. Hall, Business method patents, innovation, and policy, Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research 2003.
72.    A.P. Engelfriet, ‘De puinhoop van het Europese softwareoctrooi’, Fiat Justitia: Recht 2.0 2011 (23), 3, p. 15-20. 
73.    Y. Breindl, ‘Internet-based protest in European policymaking: The case of digital activism’, International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP) 2010, 1.1, p. 57-72.
74.    Supreme Court of the United States (Verenigde Staten) 19 juni 2014, Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 134 S. Ct. 2347.
75.    R.S. Sachs, ‘The One Year Anniversary: The Aftermath of #AliceStorm’, Bilskiblog 20 juni 2015; Zie ook S. Callahan, ‘Alice: The Death of Software-Related Patents?’, Northern District of Texas Blog 1 mei 2015.
76.    J. Bessen & A. Nuvolari, ‘Knowledge Sharing among Inventors: Some Historical Perspectives’, Laboratory of Economics and Management 2011, 21. 
77.    J. Bessen & E. Maskin, ‘Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation’, The RAND Journal of Economics 2009(40), afl. 4, p. 611-635.
78.    C. Shapiro, ‘Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-Setting’, Innovation Policy and the Economy 2000 (1), p. 119-150.
79.    M. Boldrin, D. Levine & A. Nuvolari, ‘Do Patents Encourage or Hinder Innovation? The Case of the Steam Engine’, The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty 2008, 58(10), p.14-17.
80.    B.H. Hall & R.H. Ziedonis, ’The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry1979-1995’, Rand Journal of Economics 2001, p. 101-128; D.J. Weitzner, ‘Standards, patents and the dynamics of innovation on the world wide web’, Technical Report, MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory 2004.
81.    M. Asay, ‘A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Market: Linux, the General Public License, and a New Model for Software Innovation’, Stanford Law School 2002.
82.    M. Andreessen, ‘Why Software Is Eating the World’, Wall Street Journal 2011, 20.  
83.    M. Satyanarayanan, ‘Pervasive computing: Vision and challenges’, IEEE Personal communications 2001, 8(4), p. 10-17.
84.    F. Zambonelli e.a., ‘Algorithmic Governance in Smart Cities: The Conundrum and the Potential of Pervasive Computing Solutions’, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 2018, 37(2), p. 80-87.
85.    R. Adner & P. Zemsky, ‘Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition’, CEPR Discussion Article 2003, 3994. 
86.    C.M. Christensen, The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, Boston: Harvard Business School Press 1997.
87.    M. Coccia, ‘Asymmetry of the technological cycle of disruptive innovations’, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 2020, 32(12), p. 1462-1477.
88.    M. Latzer, ‘ICT Innovations: Radical & Disruptive? Vague Concepts–Delicate Choices–Conflicting Results’, New Media & Society 2009, 11(4), p. 599-619.
89.    C. Shapiro & H.R. Varian, Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Boston: Harvard Business Review Press 1998.  
90.    A.F. Nmungwun, Video Recording Technology: Its Impact on Media and Home Entertainment, Londen: Routledge 2012. 
91.    G. Gavetti, R. Henderson & S. Giorgi, Kodak and the digital revolution (A), Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing 2005.
92.    S. Vallas  & J.B. Schor, ‘What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Dig Economy’, Annual Review of Sociology 2020, 46, p. 273-294; Zie ook K. Frenken & J. van Slageren, ‘Kluseconomie Is Meer Dan Uber en Deliveroo’, ESB-Dossier 2018, 103, p. 27-31.
93.    Geciteerd in S. Moroni, ‘Planning, Liberty and the Rule of Law, Planning Theory 2007, 6(2), p. 146-163.
94.    K. Werbach, ‘The Song Remains the Same: What Cyberlaw Might Teach the Next Internet Economy’, Florida Law Review 2017, 69, p. 887.
95.    B.H.M., Custers, ‘Nieuwe digitale (grond)rechten’, Nederlands Juristenblad 2019, 44, p. 3288-3295.
96.    H.H. Koh, ‘On American Exceptionalism. Stanford Law Review 2002, 55, p. 1479.
97.    M.L. Jones, ‘Does Technology Drive Law? The Dilemma of Technological Exceptionalism in Cyberlaw’, University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology & Policy 2018, p. 249.
98.    J. M. Balkin, ‘The Path of Robotics Law’, California Law Review 2015, 6(45); Zie ook M.L. Jones, ‘Does Technology Drive Law? The Dilemma of Technological Exceptionalism in Cyberlaw’, University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology & Policy 2018, p. 249-253.
99.    J.R. Reidenberg, ‘Lex Informatica: The Formulation of Information Policy Rules through Technology’, Texas Law Review 1997, 76-3, p. 553-593. 
100.    M.E. Kaminski, ‘Authorship, Disrupted: AI Authors in Copyright and First Amendment Law’, University of California Davis Law Review 2017, 51/589, p. 590–591.
101.    R. Crootof & B.J. Ard, ‘Structuring Techlaw’, Harvard Journal Law & Technology 2021, 34, p. 348-349.
102.    D. Collingridge, The social control of technology, Londen: Frances Pinter 1980.

Referenties andere hoofdstukken

Hoofdstuk 5 

Hoofdstuk 6 

Hoofdstuk 7 (u bevindt zich op deze pagina)

Hoofdstuk 8