Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorJoe Hadzima.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAhuja, Rishien_US
dc.contributor.otherSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-02-14T15:18:00Z
dc.date.available2013-02-14T15:18:00Z
dc.date.copyright2012en_US
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/76923
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M. in Engineering and Management)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Engineering Systems Division, System Design and Management Program, 2012.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 70-73).en_US
dc.description.abstractThe thesis that follows is an attempt to gain a deeper understanding of intellectual property from a policy as well as a strategic perspective. While the discussion that follows is applicable to intellectual property in general, the focus of this thesis is on a particular aspect of intellectual property i.e patents. Policy and strategic perspectives are covered in section I and 11 respectively. The section on policy explores the origin and evolution of intellectual property related policies by discussing key legislation and court cases. The two questions that were most relevant when exploring the policy side of the patent system were: -- Is the intellectual property system hindering or encouraging innovation? -- What changes, if any, are required to make the system more effective? The section on strategy looks at IP strategies (or lack thereof) of three leading companies, Apple, Google and Microsoft. These three companies were selected because of their apparently differing strategies and this cursory judgement was confirmed when the strategies of the companies were put under a microscope. The question that were central while exploring the strategic aspects of intellectual property were: -- How are these three companies coping with the patent system as it exists today? -- What changes can make the strategies employed more effective? The summary section at the end tries to reconcile these two different ways of looking at the intellectual property system into a coherent whole.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Rishi Ahuja.en_US
dc.format.extent73 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectEngineering Systems Division.en_US
dc.subjectSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.titleIntellectual property : strategy and policyen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.in Engineering and Managementen_US
dc.contributor.departmentSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Division
dc.identifier.oclc824176729en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record