Explore the evidence.
Understand the reach.

This article seeks to explore the conflict between Samsung and Apple. The conflict has been one of the most outstanding patent wars in the history of the smartphone industry. Apple and Samsung are among the most popular manufacturers of commonly used smartphones and tablets. The conflict began when Apple decided to file a federal lawsuit in the US district court, accusing Samsung of copying some of its iPhone features in the Samsung Galaxy S II smartphone. The court ascertained that the gadget had similar characteristics to Apple, thus ordering Samsung to pay Apple for the damages. In response, Samsung reacted by filing countersuits. The two firms, almost fifty cases in different nations and regions. The issues lasted for seven years, starting from 2011 and ending in 2016, in which both companies benefited and lost at the same time. The conflict emanated because of each firm pursuing its competitive advantage in the market. Apart from following market shares, third parties, like consumers, instigated the conflict, with international politics and the media playing a role.

The research and development (R&D) process is critical to a firm’s competitive advantage and often requires external funding.  Yet, we know little about how different types of investors respond to the cash needs of established R&D intensive firms nor about how external financial analysts influence those decisions.  We address these gaps by examining how a firm’s patenting activity affects its ability to raise cash.  We distinguish the motivations of two investor groups: open-market and alliance partners.  We focus on how patents based on emergent technologies impact two types of investors and their willingness to fund the R&D process.  We develop theory and test our hypotheses using data from publicly traded biopharmaceutical firms by drawing upon knowledge-based view, alliance, and investment theories.  We find evidence that patents built upon emergent technologies are viewed differently by the two types of investors.  We find open market investors were less likely to invest in emergent technologies and invested less when they did.  Conversely, alliance partner investors would be more appreciative of the opportunities new technology inputs present, thus, more likely to invest in firms using emergent technologies and invest more. 

This article seeks to explore the conflict between Samsung and Apple. The conflict has been one of the most outstanding patent wars in the history of the smartphone industry. Apple and Samsung are among the most popular manufacturers of commonly used smartphones and tablets. The conflict began when Apple decided to file a federal lawsuit in the US district court, accusing Samsung of copying some of its iPhone features in the Samsung Galaxy S II smartphone. The court ascertained that the gadget had similar characteristics to Apple, thus ordering Samsung to pay Apple for the damages. In response, Samsung reacted by filing countersuits. The two firms, almost fifty cases in different nations and regions. The issues lasted for seven years, starting from 2011 and ending in 2016, in which both companies benefited and lost at the same time. The conflict emanated because of each firm pursuing its competitive advantage in the market. Apart from following market shares, third parties, like consumers, instigated the conflict, with international politics and the media playing a role.

The research and development (R&D) process is critical to a firm’s competitive advantage and often requires external funding.  Yet, we know little about how different types of investors respond to the cash needs of established R&D intensive firms nor about how external financial analysts influence those decisions.  We address these gaps by examining how a firm’s patenting activity affects its ability to raise cash.  We distinguish the motivations of two investor groups: open-market and alliance partners.  We focus on how patents based on emergent technologies impact two types of investors and their willingness to fund the R&D process.  We develop theory and test our hypotheses using data from publicly traded biopharmaceutical firms by drawing upon knowledge-based view, alliance, and investment theories.  We find evidence that patents built upon emergent technologies are viewed differently by the two types of investors.  We find open market investors were less likely to invest in emergent technologies and invested less when they did.  Conversely, alliance partner investors would be more appreciative of the opportunities new technology inputs present, thus, more likely to invest in firms using emergent technologies and invest more.