Volume I
Introduction Shubha Ghosh
PART I INTRODUCTION: THE CONCEPT OF INNOVATION AND THE ROLE OF LAW
1. Robert P. Merges and Richard R. Nelson (1990), ‘On the Complex Economics of Patent Scope’, Columbia Law Review, 90 (4), May, 839–916
2. Brett Frischmann (2000), ’Innovation and Institutions: Rethinking the Economics of U.S. Science and Technology Policy’, Vermont Law Review, 24, Fall, 347–416
3. Robert Cooter (2005), ‘Innovation, Information, and the Poverty of Nations’, Florida State University Law Review, 33 (2), Winter, 373–93
4. Ronald J. Gilson, Charles F. Sabel and Robert E. Scott (2013), ‘Contract and Innovation: The Limited Role of Generalist Courts in the Evolution of Novel Contractual Forms’, New York University Law Review, 88 (3), April, 170–215
5. Katherine J. Strandburg (2009), ‘Evolving Innovation Paradigms and the Global Intellectual Property Regime’, Connecticut Law Review, 41 (3), February, 861–920
PART II INCENTIVES, LAW AND INNOVATION
6. Amy L. Landers (2006), ‘Let the Games Begin: Incentives to Innovation in the New Economy of Intellectual Property Law’, Santa Clara Law Review, 46 (2), 307–75
7. Jonathan B. Baker (2007), ‘Beyond Schumpeter vs. Arrow: How Antitrust Fosters Innovation’, Antitrust Law Journal, 74 (3), 575–602
8. Giovanni Dosi, Luigi Marengo and Corrado Pasquali (2007), ‘Knowledge, Competition and Innovation: Is Strong IPR Protection Really Needed for More and Better Innovations?’, Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, 13 (2), Spring, 471–85
9. Petra Moser (2012), ‘Innovation without Patents: Evidence from World’s Fairs’, Journal of Law and Economics, 55 (1), February, 43–74
10. Dotan Oliar (2012), ‘The Copyright-Innovation Tradeoff: Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Intentional Infliction of Harm’, Stanford Law Review, 64 (4), April, 951–1020
11. Ted Sichelman (2010), ‘Commercializing Patents’, Stanford Law Review, 62 (2), January, 341–413
12. Thomas Cheng (2013), ‘Putting Innovation Incentives Back in the Patent-Antitrust Interface’, Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 11 (5), April, 385–439
13. Murat C. Mungan (2014), ‘Less Protection, More Innovation?’, Supreme Court Economic Review, 22 (1), January, 123–46
14. Lisa Larrimore Ouellette (2015), ‘Patentable Subject Matter and Nonpatent Innovation Incentives’, UC Irvine Law Review, 5 (5), December, 1115–45
PART III CUMULATIVE AND OPEN INNOVATION
15. Clarisa Long (2000), ‘Patents and Cumulative Innovation’, Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, Re-Engineering Patent Law: The Challenge of New Technologies, 2, January, 229–46
16. Joel West (2009), ‘Policy Challenges of Open, Cumulative, and User Innovation’, Washington University Journal of Law and Policy: Open Source and Proprietary Models of Innovation, 30, 17–41
17. Keith Sawyer (2009), ‘The Collaborative Nature of Innovation’, Washington University Journal of Law and Policy: Open Source and Proprietary Models of Innovation, 30, 293–324
18. Chidi Oguamanam (2013), ‘Open Innovation in Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture’, Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property, 13 (1), 11–50
19. Clark D. Asay (2015), ‘Enabling Patentless Innovation’, Maryland Law Review, 74 (3), 431–95
Volume II
Introduction An introduction to both volumes by the editor appears in Volume I
PART I SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF INNOVATION
1. Doris Estelle Long (2008), ‘Crossing the Innovation Divide’, Temple Law Review, 81 (2), Summer, 507–43
2. Anupam B. Jena, Stéphane Mechoulan and Tomas J. Philipson (2010), ‘Altruism and Innovation in Healthcare’, Journal of Law and Economics, 53 (3), August, 497–518
3. Peter Lee (2014), ‘Social Innovation’, Washington University Law Review, 92 (1), 1–71
4. Sofia Ranchordás (2015), ‘Does Sharing Mean Caring? Regulating Innovation in the Sharing Economy’, Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, 16 (1), 413–75
PART II INNOVATION AND MARKETS
5. Jonathan B. Baker (1999), ‘Promoting Innovation Competition through the Aspen/Kodak Rule’, George Mason Law Review, 7 (3), Spring, 495–521
6. Tim Wu (2006), ‘Intellectual Property, Innovation, and Decentralized Decisions’, Virginia Law Review, 92 (1), March, 123–47
7. Timothy O’Hearn (2008), ‘Guarding Profits from Innovation: Successful Intellectual Property Strategies’, DePaul Business and Commercial Law Journal, 6 (3), Spring, 433–50
8. Jonathan M. Barnett (2009), ‘Property as Process: How Innovation Markets Select Innovation Regimes’, Yale Law Journal, 119 (3), December, 384–456
9. John D. Harkrider and Russell M. Steinthal (2011), ‘The Open Source Paradox: Innovation in the Absence of Exclusive Property Rights’, Competition Law International, 7 (2), November, 38–41
10. Robert W. Gomulkiewicz (2012), ‘Fostering the Business of Innovation: The Untold Story of Bowers v. Baystate Technologies’, Washington Journal of Law, Technology and Arts, 7 (4), Spring, 445–66
11. Michael A. Carrier (2012), ‘Copyright and Innovation: The Untold Story’, Wisconsin Law Review, 2012 (4), November, 891–962
12. Colleen Chien (2014), ‘Startups and Patent Trolls’, Stanford Technology Law Review, 17 (2), Winter, 461–505
PART III INNOVATION POLICY
13. Marlynn Wei (2007), ‘Should Prizes Replace Patents? A Critique of the Medical Innovation Prize Act of 2005’, Boston University Journal of Science and Technology Law, 13 (1), Winter, 25–45
14. Jay P. Kesan (2009), ‘Transferring Innovation’, Fordham Law Review, 77 (5), April, 2169–223
15. Gaia Bernstein (2010), ‘In the Shadow of Innovation’, Cardozo Law Review, 31 (6), June, 2257–312
16. Sarah Tran (2012), ‘Prioritizing Innovation’, Wisconsin International Law Journal, 30 (3), Spring, 499–557
17. Miguel Ángel Bernal Blay (2014), ‘The Strategic Use of Public Procurement in Support of Innovation’, European Procurement and Public Private Partnership Law Review, 9 (1), 3–11
18. Lisa Larrimore Ouellette (2015), ‘Nanotechnology and Innovation Policy’, Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 29 (1), Fall, 33–75
19. Camilla A. Hrdy (2015), ‘Commercialization Awards’, Wisconsin Law Review, 2015 (1), 13–86
20. Tal Z. Zarsky (2015), ‘The Privacy-Innovation Conundrum’, Lewis and Clark Law Review, 19 (1), 115–68
Index
