Case Study Alternative Business Models

Forth, try to make the innovation to be accepted as the industry standard. Fifth, monitor their competitors, especially those own important complementary assets. Case 1 .

Consider the challenges Testers faced in counterclaiming its chip scale packaging technology. What alternatives did it have for monitoring these inventions? Were there alternative business models that might have been practical for it to pursue? Testers can invest their own product lines to produce their inventions. This will protect the inventions from being taken by their licensees.

In addition, those manufacturers who infringe will not pay the cheap back damage, but a high penalty eased on how many products they produce. Testers can also sale its innovation for a plenty amount of capital.

This can make everything easy. Testers will not be bother with the coming patent problem and additional customer services. However, erasers will also lose the long-term return and may have less customer awareness. Or invest their product lines will be a good alternative business model for Testers.

Because Testers has both technical and enough capital, Testers can do better than their licensees. Though new product lines cost a lot and Testers is new to this easiness model, it has the strength to make a try.

In addition, Testers knows the inventions better; they can improve them fast and accurately. 2. How would a licensee view Teaser’s chip scale packaging technology over time, and what might be TTS motivations? A licensee would consider Teaser’s chip scale packaging technology as a outdated invention over time. A licensee will try to produce their product based on Teaser’s technology.

Then the licensee doesn’t need to pay for the license fee, the cost of renewal, and cost of training.

Although this may violate Teaser’s patent, the profit will be much high than the back damages paid. 3. Do you think the silent air cooling technology is amenable to the same licensing model as the Chip scale packaging or micro optics? Why or why not? I believe the silent air cooling technology is difficult to be amenable to the same licensing model as the chip scale packaging. First, the silent air cooling technology is consisted of 76 different patents.

This makes it difficult to be protected, since other manufacturers can make it efferent product from the original one at law by changing some design among those patents.

Second, it is a so complex invention that Testers has to pay more attention on training the licensees and the renewal may be expensive. Third, the licensees will pay more for the silent air cooling technology than for the chip scale packaging, but they tact the same patent problems. This time the licensees will lose lot more than in the case of the chip scale packaging. So they will have less motivation to pay for the license.