Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries
Abstract
This paper analyses the policy implications of licensing between producers of differentiated goods. We consider and compare two-part tariff, fixed fee, royalty and collusive licensing contracts. Under the optimal licensing policy, there will be no technology transfers if the innovation size is sufficiently small and degree of product differentiation is sufficiently low. On the other hand, licensing deals that involve drastic innovations are always socially desirable. In the limit, as product differentiation converges to zero, it becomes socially desirable to transfer drastic innovations only. The range of innovation sizes that is socially optimal to transfer increases as product differentiation increases.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Paper provided by The University of Melbourne in its series Department of Economics - Working Papers Series with number 894.Length: 36 pages
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mlb:wpaper:894
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne, 5th Floor, Economics and Commerce Building, Victoria, 3010, Australia
Phone: +61 3 8344 5289
Fax: +61 3 8344 6899
Email:
Web page: http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au
More information through EDIRC
Related research
Keywords: Patent licensing; product differentiation; antitrust policy;Other versions of this item:
- Nisvan Erkal, 2005. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, 03.
- D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
- O38 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
References
References listed on IDEASPlease report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea, 2003.
"Licensing the market for technology,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 277-295, October.
- Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea, 2003. "Licensing the market for technology," Open Access publications from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid info:hdl:10016/13388, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
- Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea, 1999. "Licensing the Market for Technology," CEPR Discussion Papers 2284, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Henry Wang, X., 2002. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a differentiated Cournot duopoly," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 253-266.
- Katharine E. Rockett, 1990. "Choosing the Competition and Patent Licensing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 161-171, Spring.
- Sougata Poddar & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2004.
"On Patent Licensing in Spatial Competition,"
The Economic Record,
The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(249), pages 208-218, 06.
- Sougata Poddar & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2002. "On Patent Licensing in Spatial Competition," Departmental Working Papers wp0212, National University of Singapore, Department of Economics.
- Anand, Bharat N & Khanna, Tarun, 2000. "The Structure of Licensing Contracts," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 103-35, March.
- Muto Shigeo, 1993. "On Licensing Policies in Bertrand Competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 257-267, April.
- Wang, X. Henry, 1998. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-62, July.
- Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
- Nisvan Erkal, 2004.
"Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries,"
Department of Economics - Working Papers Series
894, The University of Melbourne.
- Nisvan Erkal, 2005. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, 03.
- Choi, J.P., 1995.
"Technology Transfer with Moral Hazard,"
Discussion Papers
1995_16, Columbia University, Department of Economics.
- Choi, Jay Pil, 2001. "Technology transfer with moral hazard," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 249-266, January.
- Choi, Jay Pil, 1996. "Technology Transfer with Moral Hazard," Economics Series 22, Institute for Advanced Studies.
- Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1997. "Antitrust Issues in the Licensing of Intellectual Property: The Nine No-No's Meet the Nineties," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 28(1997 Micr), pages 283-349.
- Fauli-Oller, Ramon & Sandonis, Joel, 2002. "Welfare reducing licensing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 192-205, November.
- Nancy T. Gallini & Brian D. Wright, 1990. "Technology Transfer under Asymmetric Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 147-160, Spring.
- Beggs, A. W., 1992. "The licensing of patents under asymmetric information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 171-191, June.
- Marjit, Sugata, 1990. "On a non-cooperative theory of technology transfer," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 293-298, July.
- Rockett, Katharine, 1990. "The quality of licensed technology," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 559-574, December.
- Kamien, Morton I & Tauman, Yair, 2002. "Patent Licensing: The Inside Story," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 70(1), pages 7-15, January.
- Kamien, Morton I., 1992. "Patent licensing," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 331-354 Elsevier.
- Macho-Stadler, Ines & Martinez-Giralt, Xavier & David Perez-Castrillo, J., 1996.
"The role of information in licensing contract design,"
Research Policy,
Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 43-57, January.
- Macho, I. & Martinez-Giralt, X. & Perez-Castrillo, D., 1993. "The Role of Information in Licensing Contract Design," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 216.93, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Patent Licensing and R&D Rivalry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 25-30, May.
- Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "How to License Intangible Property," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 567-89, August.
- Fauli-Oller, Ramon & Sandonis, Joel, 2003. "To merge or to license: implications for competition policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 655-672, May.
- Kamien, Morton I & Tauman, Yair, 1986. "Fees versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 471-91, August.
- Lin, Ping, 1996. "Fixed-Fee Licensing of Innovations and Collusion," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 443-49, December.
- Aidan Hollis, 2002. "Strategic Implications of Learning by Doing," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 157-174.
- Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1985. "On the Licensing of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 504-520, Winter.
- Wang, X Henry & Yang, Bill Z, 1999. "On Licensing under Bertrand Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 106-19, June.
- Kamien, Morton I. & Oren, Shmuel S. & Tauman, Yair, 1992. "Optimal licensing of cost-reducing innovation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 483-508.
- Mukesh Eswaran, 1994.
"Licensees as Entry Barriers,"
Canadian Journal of Economics,
Canadian Economics Association, vol. 27(3), pages 673-88, August.
- Eswaran, M., 1992. "Licensees as Entry Barriers," UBC Departmental Archives 92-17, UBC Department of Economics.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Meniere, Yann & Parlane, Sarah, 2010.
"Decentralized licensing of complementary patents: Comparing the royalty, fixed-fee and two-part tariff regimes,"
Information Economics and Policy,
Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 178-191, May.
- Yann Ménière & Sarah Parlane, 2010. "Decentralized licensing of complementary patents: Comparing the royalty, fixed-fee and two-part tariff regimes," Post-Print hal-00460754, HAL.
- Poddar, Sougata & Bouguezzi, Fehmi, 2011. "Patent licensing in spatial competition: Does pre-innovation cost asymmetry matter?," MPRA Paper 32764, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Nisvan Erkal, 2005.
"Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries,"
The Economic Record,
The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, 03.
- Nisvan Erkal, 2004. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 894, The University of Melbourne.
- BHATTACHARYA, Sudipto & D’ASPREMONT, Claude & GURIEV, Sergei & SEN, Debapriya, 2012. "Cooperation in R&D: patenting, licensing and contracting," CORE Discussion Papers 2012055, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Changying Li & Junmei Wang, 2010. "Licensing a Vertical Product Innovation," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(275), pages 517-527, December.
- Yair Tauman & Debrapiya Sen, 2012. "Patents and Licenses," Department of Economics Working Papers 12-05, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
- Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2012. "Patent licensing with Bertrand competitors," DISCE - Quaderni dell'Istituto di Teoria Economica e Metodi Quantitativi itemq1262, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
- Li, Changying & Geng, Xiaoyan, 2008. "Licensing to a durable-good monopoly," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 876-884, September.
- Li, Changying & Ji, Xiaoming, 2010. "Innovation, licensing, and price vs. quantity competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 746-754, May.
- Li, Changying & Song, Juan, 2009. "Technology licensing in a vertically differentiated duopoly," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 183-190, March.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mlb:wpaper:894For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marisa Cerantola).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

