Works matching DE "AT%26T (Company)"
1
- Government Technology, 2018, v. 31, n. 8, p. 20
- Article
4
- Government Technology, 2011, v. 24, n. 5, p. 28
- Article
5
- Government Technology, 2011, v. 24, n. 4, p. 30
- Article
6
- Space & Culture, 2011, v. 14, n. 1, p. 85, doi. 10.1177/1206331210389273
- Article
7
- Journal of Corporation Law, 2011, v. 36, n. 4, p. 847
- Article
8
- Journal of Corporation Law, 2011, v. 36, n. 2, p. 495
- Article
9
- Journal of Public Affairs (14723891), 2016, v. 16, n. 1, p. 57, doi. 10.1002/pa.1568
- Article
10
- Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 2008, v. 10, n. 2, p. 1
- Article
12
- Production & Operations Management, 2011, v. 20, n. 3, p. vii, doi. 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2011.01181.x
- Article
14
- Bench & Bar of Minnesota, 2024, v. 81, n. 3, p. 10
- Article
15
- Reference Librarian, 2011, v. 52, n. 1/2, p. 159, doi. 10.1080/02763877.2011.528341
- Article
16
- Journal of Information Policy, 2014, v. 4, p. 28, doi. 10.5325/jinfopoli.4.2014.0028
- Article
17
- EE: Evaluation Engineering, 2016, v. 55, n. 11, p. 2
- Article
18
- Tax Executive, 2017, v. 69, n. 5, p. 22
- Article
19
- Tax Executive, 2015, v. 67, n. 1, p. 18
- Article
20
- Annals of Business Administrative Science (ABAS), 2013, v. 12, n. 3, p. 123, doi. 10.7880/abas.12.123
- TAKAHASHI, Nobuo;
- TAKAMATSU, Tomofumi
- Article
21
- Cato Supreme Court Review, 2010, p. 263
- Article
22
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2008, v. 23, n. 1, p. 651
- Article
23
- Stanford Technology Law Review, 2013, p. 453
- Article
24
- Yale Law Journal, 2010, v. 120, n. 2, p. 379
- Article
25
- University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 2022, v. 170, n. 2, p. 523
- Article
26
- JCMS: Journal of Cinema & Media Studies, 2021, v. 60, n. 5, p. 150, doi. 10.1353/cj.2021.0059
- Article
27
- Antitrust Bulletin, 2024, v. 69, n. 1, p. 44, doi. 10.1177/0003603X241228689
- Zimmerman, Paul R.;
- Chang, George;
- Ulrick, Shawn W.
- Article
28
- Feminist Economics, 1996, v. 2, n. 1, p. 121, doi. 10.1080/738552693
- Article
29
- Seton Hall Law Review, 2021, v. 51, n. 4, p. 1193
- Article
30
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2012, v. 31, n. 1, p. 113
- Article
31
- Competition Law & Policy Debate (Claeys & Casteels BV), 2017, v. 3, n. 4, p. 76, doi. 10.4337/clpd.2017.04.08
- Article
32
- Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 2013, v. 9, n. 1, p. 23, doi. 10.1093/joclec/nhs035
- Besen, Stanley M.;
- Kletter, Stephen D.;
- Moresi, Serge X.;
- Salop, Steven C.;
- Woodbury, John R.
- Article
33
- Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 2013, v. 9, n. 1, p. 49, doi. 10.1093/joclec/nhs041
- Article
35
- International Journal of Micrographics & Optical Technology, 2010, v. 28, n. 3, p. 4
- Article
36
- Journal of Property Management, 2013, v. 78, n. 4, p. 16
- Article
37
- Journal of Case Studies, 2013, v. 31, n. 1, p. 55
- Gaharan, Catherine;
- Foust, Karen;
- Harmel, Robert
- Article
39
- Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter, 2017, v. 43, n. 4, p. 46
- Article
40
- Journal of State Taxation, 2011, v. 29, n. 6, p. 5
- Article
41
- Internal Auditor, 2008, v. 65, n. 4, p. 27
- De Aquino, Carlos Elder Maciel;
- Da Silva, Washington Lopes;
- Vasarhelyi, Miklos A.
- Article
42
- Business Lawyer, 2022, v. 78, n. 1, p. 247
- Article
43
- Democratic Communiqué, 2008, v. 22, n. 2, p. 66
- Article
44
- Microwave Journal, 2017, v. 60, n. 4, p. 55
- Article
45
- Microwave Journal, 2016, v. 59, n. 5, p. 49
- Article
46
- Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 2018, v. 6, n. 3, p. 459, doi. 10.1093/jaenfo/jny016
- Salop, Steven C;
- Wright, Joshua D;
- Rybnicek, Jan M
- Article
47
- People & Strategy, 2011, v. 34, n. 2, p. 6
- Article
48
- Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 2017, v. 106, n. 4, p. 141
- Article
49
- Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 2012, v. 17, p. 201
- Article
50
- Theatre Design & Technology (TD&T), 2012, v. 48, n. 4, p. 10
- Article