مهار هکرها: ظهور و بهره برداری از نوآوری غیر قانونی

This paper will explore how the often illegal activities of hackers (employed in the original usage of the term to refer to individuals who modify computer hardware and software) may produce valuable innovations. The paper argues that structural changes, including a growth in the number of knowledge workers, has resulted in a burgeoning community of users able to modify or hack existing products, or develop products that compete with existing suppliers. The paper will introduce the complementary concepts of Outlaw Innovation and the Outlaw User, locating them within the literature on users. The paper will explore how firms react to this activity and provide case studies of this phenomenon. The paper will argue that Outlaw Innovation represents an extension in our understanding of the way in which firms interact with users, presents a series of policy challenges, and opens a promising area for further research. A series of possible research questions will be outlined and the paper will conclude by indicating the next steps in the development of this line of enquiry.

Good ideas are found in many places and firms will routinely draw on a range of sources, both internal and external, as part of their innovation process. Structural changes, including the growth in the number of knowledge workers, has led to innovation becoming ‘democratised’ (von Hippel, 2005) or ‘Open’ (Chesbrough, 2003). Firm innovation may now require novel and evolving relationships with a large number of external actors whose ideas may be bought, licensed, or else are freely revealed. However, in addition to these more established sources of innovative ideas firms are now seeking to exploit the innovations that emerge from the often illegal activities of a particular form of user—the hacker.1 Although the potential for users to provide new ideas and indicate future market trends is well understood (e.g. von Hippel, 1986, Kline and Pinch, 1996, Thomke and von Hippel, 2002 and Kline, 2003), often implicit in this established view is the existence of a cooperative and consensual relationship from which both user and supplier will seek to benefit, facilitating a free flow of information between the two parties. But this is not the only kind of relationship that may exist and this paper will examine innovations that arise from attempts to: amend a product's functionality or in some other way extend or distort the intentions of the original designers; exploit design flaws in order to attack or evade security systems; or create systems or services or dubious legality in order to compete with mainstream commercial firms. These activities may violate intellectual property and pose a direct threat to established suppliers with the result that the work will often be underground in nature, operating either anonymously or with those involved seeking to obscure their links to such activities. Within this milieu, innovations will emerge from non-cooperative, non-consensual relationships in which the user may be unknown to the supplier and in which there is likely to be no free flow of information between the two parties. This paper will propose that such activity, at least within IT-intensive digital industries, is widespread and often operates in parallel with mainstream use in this area. It will argue that such Outlaw Innovations may be adapted by firms and supplement mainstream innovation processes, directly impacting on firm R&D, and potentially leading to new or improved products and the creation of new markets. The paper will introduce the notions of Outlaw Innovation and Outlaw User, locate these concepts in the innovation literature, provide examples of this phenomenon, and explore the implications for firm innovation processes and policy. The approaches that firms employ in response to such activity in order to either resist or benefit from the innovations that Outlaw Users generate will be outlined, and the paper will explore how the challenge presented by Outlaw Innovation can act to supplement in-house innovative activities. The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 will explore how the role of the user has been discussed within the innovation literature and introduce the concepts of Outlaw Innovation and the Outlaw User; Section 3 will present a series of case studies that examine Outlaw Innovations and explore firm reactions to such activity; Section 4 will introduce a preliminary taxonomy of Outlaw Users and explore the implications for policy and our understanding of the role of the user in innovation; Section 5 will present brief conclusions and outline a series of questions to guide further work in this area.

This paper has explored the role and impact of a wide range of ‘hacking’ activities on firm innovation. By focusing on hacking, a phenomenon whose impact on innovation is not fully understood, it has sought to extend the existing literature examining the role of the user in firm innovation and the changing nature of the innovation process itself. In developing this discussion the related notions of Outlaw User and Outlaw Innovation were introduced. The relationship between the Outlaw User and the current understanding of the user's role in innovation was explored and the linkages to the lead user concept were outlined. It was proposed that the emergence of Outlaw Innovation is the result of the same forces that have resulted in innovation becoming ‘democratised’ (von Hippel, 2005) or ‘Open’ (Chesbrough, 2003), but has found expression as a voice of dissent. The paper suggested that Outlaw Innovation, at least within IT-intensive digital industries, is the result of widespread activity amongst Outlaw Users, often operating in parallel with commercial activity. The paper argued that such Outlaw Innovations may be appropriated by firms and acts as an additional source of innovation that may be appropriated, resulting in new and improved products and new markets. A series of cases in which firms had sought develop appropriate responses to Outlaw Innovations were introduced and a series of organisational responses were identified. Cases in which firms had been either successful or unsuccessful in appropriating Outlaw Innovations were examined and the potential dangers of straightforward imitation were identified. This paper has outlined the emergence and impact of Outlaw Innovation and the results presented must be viewed as provisional and further research will be required to develop this line of enquiry. It should be recognised that this work will face a number of challenges, both of a methodological and practical nature. Lines of enquiry that may guide further work in this area include: the scale and scope of Outlaw Innovation; the nature of the linkages between firm and Outlaw Users; the impact of Outlaw Innovation in non-IT-intensive industries; firm reactions to Outlaw Innovation; the impact of Outlaw Innovation on the direction and path of product innovation; the circumstances in which firms seek to foster Outlaw Innovation activities; the way in which firm responses to this form of activity vary over time and between sector; the conditions under which firms may benefit from an intentioned interaction with outlaw groups. The paper also explored potential policy responses and examined the difficulties of framing policy in this area. The emergence of such outlaw activities also raises a series of questions for our understanding of innovation including the networked nature of outlaw systems of innovation (e.g. file sharing) and the shifting relationship between users and suppliers. Subsequent stages of this research will develop a structured approach to expanding our understanding of this area.