IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notecp/10-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technology licensing under convex costs

Author

Listed:
  • Arijit Mukherjee

Abstract

The technology licensing literature has completely dominated by the assumption of constant returns to scale technology, while the implications of convex costs have been discussed extensively in the Industrial Organization literature or in the Microeconomics literature, in general. We show that an “outside innovator” and the society may prefer royalty licensing compared to auction (or fixed-fee licensing) under convex costs. There can also be conflicting interests between the innovator and the society about the preferred licensing contract. However, the consumers always prefer auction. It follows from our analysis that a combination of royalty and fixedfee can dominate both auction (of fixed-fee licensing) and royalty only licensing.

Suggested Citation

  • Arijit Mukherjee, "undated". "Technology licensing under convex costs," Discussion Papers 10/05, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:not:notecp:10/05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/documents/discussion-papers/10-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    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. 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, June.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Rockett, Katharine, 1990. "The quality of licensed technology," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 559-574, December.
    6. Mukherjee, Arijit & Balasubramanian, N., 2001. "Technology transfer in a horizontally differentiated product market," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 257-274, September.
    7. Choi, Jay Pil, 2001. "Technology transfer with moral hazard," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 249-266, January.
    8. Andrea Fosfuri & Esther Roca, 2004. "Optimal Licensing Strategy: Royalty or Fixed Fee?," International Journal of Business and Economics, College of Business and College of Finance, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 3(1), pages 13-19, April.
    9. Wang, X Henry & Yang, Bill Z, 1999. "On Licensing under Bertrand Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 106-119, June.
    10. Kamien, Morton I. & Tauman, Yair & Zang, Israel, 1988. "Optimal license fees for a new product," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 77-106, August.
    11. Sougata Poddar & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2002. "The Role of Fixed Fee and Royalty in Patent Licensing," Departmental Working Papers wp0211, National University of Singapore, Department of Economics.
    12. 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.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2007:i:3:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Wang, X. Henry, 1998. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-62, July.
    15. 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.
    16. Beggs, A. W., 1992. "The licensing of patents under asymmetric information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 171-191, June.
    17. Tarun Kabiraj, 2004. "Patent Licensing in a Leadership Structure," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 72(2), pages 188-205, March.
    18. Bousquet, Alain & Cremer, Helmuth & Ivaldi, Marc & Wolkowicz, Michel, 1998. "Risk sharing in licensing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 535-554, September.
    19. Kamien, Morton I & Tauman, Yair, 2002. "Patent Licensing: The Inside Story," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 70(1), pages 7-15, January.
    20. 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.
    21. Tarun Kabiraj, 2005. "Technology Transfer In A Stackelberg Structure: Licensing Contracts And Welfare," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 73(1), pages 1-28, January.
    22. Sougata Poddar & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2005. "Patent Licensing from High-Cost Firm to Low-Cost Firm," Departmental Working Papers wp0503, National University of Singapore, Department of Economics.
    23. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2002:i:6:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. 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.
    25. Ana I. Saracho, 2002. "Patent Licensing Under Strategic Delegation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(2), pages 225-251, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auction; Convex cost; Fixed-fee; Licensing; Royalty;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:not:notecp:10/05. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/denotuk.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.