IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/piecis/383.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decentralized of licensing of complementary patents: comparing royalty, fixed fee and two part tariff

Author

Listed:
  • M?ni?re, Yann
  • Parlane, Sarah

Abstract

This paper analyzes how an inventor should fix the licensing terms to license a standard in complying with a non-discrimination requirement. Using a model incorporating imperfect competition between a finite number of users and product differentiation, we compare three different regimes: fixed fee (also known as royalty free), per unit royalty and two-part tariff. We highlight the different effects of each design on prices and number of varieties. We identify which one dominates with respect to the licensor's profit and total welfare. Finally we extend our model to a setting where the standard is protected by several licenses owned by non-cooperating owners.

Suggested Citation

  • M?ni?re, Yann & Parlane, Sarah, 2008. "Decentralized of licensing of complementary patents: comparing royalty, fixed fee and two part tariff," PIE/CIS Discussion Paper 383, Center for Intergenerational Studies, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:hit:piecis:383
    Note: June 13, 2008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/15851/pie_dp383.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. repec:adr:anecst:y:2002:i:66:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bekkers, Rudi & Verspagen, Bart & Smits, Jan, 0. "Intellectual property rights and standardization: the case of GSM," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 171-188, April.
    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. 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.
    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. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    4. Mario Calderini & Andrea Giannaccari, 2006. "Standardisation in the ICT sector: The (complex) interface between antitrust and intellectual property," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 543-567.
    5. 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.
    6. Kroll, Henning & Berghäuser, Hendrik & Blind, Knut & Neuhäusler, Peter & Scheifele, Fabian & Thielmann, Axel & Wydra, Sven, 2022. "Schlüsseltechnologien," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 7-2022, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    7. C. Niranjan Rao, 2004. "The role of intellectual property rights in information and communication technologies," Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad Working Papers 61, Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad, India.
    8. Matthew D. Henry & John L. Turner, 2010. "Patent Damages And Spatial Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 279-305, June.
    9. de Vries, H.J. & de Ruijter, J.P.M. & Argam, N., 2009. "Dominant Design or Multiple Designs: The Flash Memory Card Case," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2009-032-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. Sánchez, M. & Nerja, A., 2024. "The role of asymmetric innovation’s sizes in technology licensing under partial vertical integration," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2).
    11. Dang, Jianwei & Kang, Byeongwoo & Ding, Ke, 2019. "International protection of standard essential patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 75-86.
    12. Lemarié, S., 2005. "Vertical integration and the licensing of innovation with a fixed fee or a royalty," Working Papers 200517, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    13. Dong Geun Choi & Heesang Lee & Tae-kyung Sung, 2011. "Research profiling for ‘standardization and innovation’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 259-278, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Lu, Yuanzhu & Poddar, Sougata, 2014. "Patent licensing in spatial models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 250-256.
    16. Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch & Cecilia Vergari, 2013. "Bargaining and delay in patent licensing," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 9(4), pages 279-302, December.
    17. Padilla, Jorge & Schmalensee, Richard & Layne-Farrar, Anna, 2007. "Pricing Patents for Licensing in Standard Setting Organisations: Making Sense of FRAND Commitments," CEPR Discussion Papers 6025, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Neelanjan Sen, 2015. "Technology Transfer in Oligopoly in Presence of Fixed-Cost in Production," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 383-409, December.
    19. Stuart Graham & Galen Hancock, 2014. "The USPTO economics research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 335-344, June.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:hit:piecis:383. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cihitjp.html .

    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.