IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/proeco/v193y2017icp502-513.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of intellectual property licensing strategy under duopoly competition: Component or product-based?

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Jingxian
  • Liang, Liang
  • Yao, Dong-qing

Abstract

A component supplier holding patents can calculate the intellectual property licensing fees either as a percentage of sales prices of its customer manufacturers' products (i.e., product-based strategy) or as a percentage of the wholesale price of its component (i.e., component-based strategy). Selecting which strategy to license the patent plays a vital role in supply-chain players' strategic interactions, especially when the downstream manufacturers compete. This paper investigates which strategy is favored more by players of a supply chain, which consists of a component supplier and two duopoly manufacturers. The manufacturers are assumed to be heterogeneous in production cost but produce and competitively sell homogenous goods. Employing a supplier Stackelberg game model, we demonstrate that the component supplier prefers to implement the product-based strategy; nevertheless, the manufacturers' preferences are dependent on how effectively they produce products. Specifically, the product-based strategy could be favored by the manufacturer with a sufficiently high cost advantage over the rival. Furthermore, we find that the supply-chain players' preferences of licensing strategy could be dependent on factors such as the market size, the differences of the production costs, and unit royalty fees when the products are imperfect substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Jingxian & Liang, Liang & Yao, Dong-qing, 2017. "An analysis of intellectual property licensing strategy under duopoly competition: Component or product-based?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 502-513.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:193:y:2017:i:c:p:502-513
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.08.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092552731730258X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.08.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fauli-Oller, Ramon & Sandonis, Joel, 2002. "Welfare reducing licensing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 192-205, November.
    2. Cai, Gangshu (George), 2010. "Channel Selection and Coordination in Dual-Channel Supply Chains," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 22-36.
    3. X. H. Wang & Bill Z. Yang, 1999. "On Licensing Under Bertrand Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 106-119, June.
    4. Giebe, Thomas & Wolfstetter, Elmar, 2008. "License auctions with royalty contracts for (winners and) losers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 91-106, May.
    5. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    6. Liwen Chen & Stephen M. Gilbert & Yusen Xia, 2016. "Product Line Extensions and Technology Licensing with a Strategic Supplier," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(6), pages 1121-1146, June.
    7. Can Erutku & Yves Richelle, 2007. "Optimal Licensing Contracts and the Value of a Patent," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 407-436, June.
    8. Pack, Howard & Saggi, Kamal, 2001. "Vertical technology transfer via international outsourcing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 389-415, August.
    9. Qi Feng & Lauren Xiaoyuan Lu, 2012. "The Strategic Perils of Low Cost Outsourcing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1196-1210, June.
    10. 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.
    11. Stamatopoulos, Giorgos & Tauman, Yair, 2008. "Licensing of a quality-improving innovation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 410-438, November.
    12. Hong, Xianpei & Govindan, Kannan & Xu, Lei & Du, Peng, 2017. "Quantity and collection decisions in a closed-loop supply chain with technology licensing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 820-829.
    13. Ashish Arora & Andrea Fosfuri & Thomas Rønde, 2013. "Managing Licensing in a Market for Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1092-1106, May.
    14. Huang, Yanting & Wang, Zongjun, 2017. "Information sharing in a closed-loop supply chain with technology licensing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 113-127.
    15. 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.
    16. Hernandez-Murillo, Ruben & Llobet, Gerard, 2006. "Patent licensing revisited: Heterogeneous firms and product differentiation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 149-175, January.
    17. Wang, X. Henry, 1998. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-62, July.
    18. Fang, Yaner & Shou, Biying, 2015. "Managing supply uncertainty under supply chain Cournot competition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 156-176.
    19. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2016. "Revenue royalties," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 47-76, May.
    20. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 2002. "Patent Licensing: The Inside Story," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 70(1), pages 7-15, January.
    21. Gerard Llobet & Jorge Padilla, 2016. "The Optimal Scope of the Royalty Base in Patent Licensing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(1), pages 45-73.
    22. Xiaole Wu & Fuqiang Zhang, 2014. "Home or Overseas? An Analysis of Sourcing Strategies Under Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1223-1240, May.
    23. 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.
    24. Ana I. Saracho, 2002. "Patent Licensing Under Strategic Delegation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 225-251, June.
    25. Francisco Caballero-Sanz & Rafael Moner-Colonques & José J. Sempere-Monerris, 2002. "Optimal Licensing in a Spatial Model," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 66, pages 257-279.
    26. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 1986. "Fees Versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 471-491.
    27. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf & David E. M. Sappington, 2007. "The Bright Side of Supplier Encroachment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 651-659, 09-10.
    29. Anupam Agrawal & Shantanu Bhattacharya & Sameer Hasija, 2016. "Cost-Reducing Innovation and the Role of Patent Intermediaries in Increasing Market Efficiency," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(2), pages 173-191, February.
    30. Wang, X Henry & Yang, Bill Z, 1999. "On Licensing under Bertrand Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 106-119, June.
    31. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "On the coexistence of different licensing schemes," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 393-413.
    32. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "Fee versus royalty reconsidered," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 141-147, October.
    33. Yue Li & Takashi Yanagawa, 2011. "Patent licensing of Stackelberg manufacturer in a differentiated product market," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 7(1), pages 7-20, March.
    34. Charles A. Ingene & Mark E. Parry, 1995. "Channel Coordination When Retailers Compete," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 360-377.
    35. repec:adr:anecst:y:2002:i:66:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    36. Zhao, Dan & Chen, Hongmin & Hong, Xianpei & Liu, Jingfang, 2014. "Technology licensing contracts with network effects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 136-144.
    37. Sanjiv Erat & Stylianos Kavadias & Cheryl Gaimon, 2013. "The Pitfalls of Subsystem Integration: When Less Is More," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 659-676, February.
    38. Chen, Jingxian & Liang, Liang & Yao, Dong-Qing & Sun, Shengnan, 2017. "Price and quality decisions in dual-channel supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(3), pages 935-948.
    39. Sanjiv Erat & Stylianos Kavadias, 2006. "Introduction of New Technologies to Competing Industrial Customers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1675-1688, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Youqiong Ai & Thomas Y. Lu, 2019. "On the Rationality of Bundled Rebate Program in Modem Chip Industry: an Analysis on Qualcomm’s Case," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 641-660, December.
    2. Qing Zhang & Juan Li & Tiaojun Xiao, 2022. "Contract design for technology sharing between two farmers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(2), pages 677-707, July.
    3. Chen, Xu & Wang, Xiaojun & Jing, Haojie, 2023. "Technology licensing strategies for three cost-differential manufacturers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(2), pages 622-635.
    4. Lindblom Ted & Mallios Aineas & Sjögren Stefan, 2024. "A Theoretical Analysis of Collusion Involving Technology Licensing Under Diseconomies of Scale," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 24(1), pages 263-297, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amir, Rabah & Encaoua, David & Lefouili, Yassine, 2014. "Optimal licensing of uncertain patents in the shadow of litigation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 320-338.
    2. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    3. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Claude d’Aspremont & Sergei Guriev & Debapriya Sen & Yair Tauman, 2014. "Cooperation in R&D: Patenting, Licensing, and Contracting," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson (ed.), Game Theory and Business Applications, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 265-286, Springer.
    4. Mukherjee, Arijit, 2010. "Licensing a new product: Fee vs. royalty licensing with unionized labor market," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 735-742, August.
    5. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2014. "Technology licensing in a differentiated oligopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 455-465.
    6. Kim, Seung-Leul & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2021. "Optimal tariffs with emissions taxes under non-restrictive two-part licensing strategies by a foreign eco-competitor," MPRA Paper 108496, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "Fee versus royalty reconsidered," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 141-147, October.
    8. Yair Tauman & Debrapiya Sen, 2012. "Patents and Licenses," Department of Economics Working Papers 12-05, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    9. Ismail Saglam, 2023. "Licensing cost‐reducing innovations under supply function competition," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 180-201, January.
    10. Arijit Mukherjee, 2010. "Technology licensing under convex costs," Discussion Papers 10/05, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    11. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2015. "Patent Licensing with Bertrand Competitors," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(1), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Bradley J. Rickard & Timothy J. Richards & Jubo Yan, 2016. "University licensing of patents for varietal innovations in agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 3-14, January.
    13. Arijit Mukherjee & Yingyi Tsai, 2013. "Technology licensing under optimal tax policy," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 231-247, April.
    14. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2007. "On patent licensing in spatial competition with endogenous location choice," Discussion Papers 2007-35, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    15. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2018. "Patent licensing in a Cournot oligopoly: General results," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 37-48.
    16. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "On the coexistence of different licensing schemes," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 393-413.
    17. Nisvan Erkal, 2005. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, March.
    18. Debapriya Sen & Giorgos Stamatopoulos, 2009. "Technology Transfer Under Returns To Scale," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 77(3), pages 337-365, June.
    19. Rabah Amir & David Encaoua & Yassine Lefouili, 2011. "Per-Unit Royalty vs Fixed Fee: The Case of Weak Patents," Working Papers halshs-00595493, HAL.
    20. San Martín Lizarralde, Marta & Saracho de la Torre, Ana Isabel, 2012. "Two-part tariff licensing mechanisms," IKERLANAK http://www-fae1-eao1-ehu-, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:193:y:2017:i:c:p:502-513. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpe .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.