IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jqecon/v22y2024i3d10.1007_s40953-024-00406-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Free Licensing in a Differentiated Duopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Tarun Kabiraj

    (Indian Statistical Institute)

  • Rittwik Chatterjee

    (Hiralal Mazumdar Memorial College for Women)

  • Srobonti Chattopadhyay

    (Rabindra Bharati University)

Abstract

We construct a differentiated duopoly model to study whether free licensing can be profitable without network externalities and demand shift effect. The efficient firm possesses a superior input-saving technology and sells inputs to the backward firm. However, the optimal input price can be constrained or unconstrained in equilibrium depending on the constellation of parameters. We have shown that free licensing can be profitable if the innovation size is small and the transferee’s input production cost is sufficiently large. But free licensing is never profitable if products are homogeneous. An increase in market size also reduces the possibility of free licensing. We have also derived an implication of free licensing in the context of pollution problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Tarun Kabiraj & Rittwik Chatterjee & Srobonti Chattopadhyay, 2024. "Free Licensing in a Differentiated Duopoly," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 22(3), pages 589-613, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jqecon:v:22:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s40953-024-00406-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s40953-024-00406-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40953-024-00406-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40953-024-00406-w?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. Corinne Langinier & Caroline Boivin, 2005. "Technology Licensing to a Rival," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(15), pages 1-8.
    2. Peitz, Martin & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2006. "Why the music industry may gain from free downloading -- The role of sampling," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 907-913, September.
    3. 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.
    4. X. H. Wang & Bill Z. Yang, 1999. "On Licensing Under Bertrand Competition," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 106-119, June.
    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. 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.
    7. Kathleen R. Conner, 1995. "Obtaining Strategic Advantage from Being Imitated: When Can Encouraging "Clones" Pay?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 209-225, February.
    8. Tarun Kabiraj, 2004. "Patent Licensing in a Leadership Structure," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 72(2), pages 188-205, March.
    9. Mukherjee, Arijit & Balasubramanian, N., 2001. "Technology transfer in a horizontally differentiated product market," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 257-274, September.
    10. Arijit Mukherjee & Udo Broll & Soma Mukherjee, 2009. "The welfare effects of entry: the role of the input market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 189-201, December.
    11. Sinha, Uday Bhanu, 2016. "Optimal value of a patent in an asymmetric Cournot duopoly market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 93-105.
    12. Arijit Mukherjee & Yingyi Tsai, 2015. "Does two-part tariff licensing agreement enhance both welfare and profit?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 116(1), pages 63-76, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Lu, Yuanzhu & Poddar, Sougata, 2014. "Patent licensing in spatial models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 250-256.
    15. Kabiraj, Abhishek & Kabiraj, Tarun, 2017. "Tariff induced licensing contracts, consumers’ surplus and welfare," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 439-447.
    16. Stamatopoulos, Giorgos & Tauman, Yair, 2008. "Licensing of a quality-improving innovation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 410-438, November.
    17. Mukherjee, Arijit, 2019. "Profit raising entry in a vertical structure," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1-1.
    18. repec:bla:ausecp:v:38:y:1999:i:2:p:106-19 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2005:i:15:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Andrea Shepard, 1987. "Licensing to Enhance Demand for New Technologies," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 360-368, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kabiraj, Tarun & Chatterjee, Rittwik & Chattopadhyay, Srobonti, 2020. "Free Licensing in a Differentiated Duopoly," MPRA Paper 101984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kabiraj, Abhishek & Kabiraj, Tarun, 2017. "Tariff induced licensing contracts, consumers’ surplus and welfare," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 439-447.
    3. 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.
    4. Banerjee, Swapnendu & Poddar, Sougata, 2019. "‘To sell or not to sell’: Licensing versus selling by an outside innovator," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 293-304.
    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. 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.
    7. Arijit Mukherjee, 2010. "Technology licensing under convex costs," Discussion Papers 10/05, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Zhao, Dan, 2017. "Choices and impacts of cross-licensing contracts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 389-405.
    11. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2014. "Technology licensing in a differentiated oligopoly," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 455-465.
    12. Yan, Qingyou & Yang, Le, 2018. "Optimal licensing in a differentiated Bertrand market under uncertain R&D outcomes and technology spillover," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 117-126.
    13. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "Fee versus royalty reconsidered," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 141-147, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Arijit Mukherjee & Yingyi Tsai, 2013. "Technology licensing under optimal tax policy," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 231-247, April.
    16. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "On the coexistence of different licensing schemes," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 393-413.
    17. Gelves, Juan Alejandro & Heywood, John S., 2016. "How does a mixed ownership firm license a patent?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 278-284.
    18. Zhang, Huaige & Wang, Xuejun & Qing, Ping & Hong, Xianpei, 2016. "Optimal licensing of uncertain patents in a differentiated Stackelberg duopolistic competition market," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 215-229.
    19. 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.
    20. Chin-Sheng Chen, 2017. "Endogenous Market Structure and Technology Licensing," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 68(1), pages 115-130, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Transferred technology; Free licensing; Product differentiation; Input pricing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D45 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Rationing; Licensing
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    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:spr:jqecon:v:22:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s40953-024-00406-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.