Selective Revealing in Open Innovation Processes: The Case of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The results leave an important gap ◦ In the case of software development based on existing OSS under the GPL, the protection mechanisms become unavailable ◦ No study exists for the decision to reveal code or not on the level of individual code contributions ◦ No empirical quantative study that relates a firm’s revealing behaviour to its characteristics exists
What latitude do firms have with respect to revealing or protecting the code they develeop for embedded Linux? What means of protection do they use and how often ? What share of the code for embedded Linux that these firms develop is made public? What type of code is typically revealed? What code is typically protected? What are the reasons for firms to make their OSS code voluntarily public? How is the degree of openness determined by firm characteristics?
Page 1 and 2: Written by Joachim Henkel Presented
Page 3 and 4: In open innovation processes, techn
Page 5 and 6: Analyzed by von Hippel (1987), Schr
Page 7 and 8: Collective invention differs from O
Page 9: To minimize the downsides of public
Page 13 and 14: The case of embedded Linux demonsra
Page 15 and 16: * This means of protection applies
Page 19 and 20: The highest agreement is “generic
Page 21 and 22: Firm size ◦ Open sourse software
Page 23 and 24: Reasons to reveal ◦ Those related
Page 25: Firms have chance to practice “se

Selective Revealing in Open Innovation Processes: The Case of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?