General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation

Games and Economic Behavior

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 163-186

  Sen, Debapriya ^a   Tauman, Yair ^b,c  

^a RYERSON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

AR policy; Cost reducing innovation; Incumbent innovator; Outside innovator

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947599098     PISSN: 08998256     EISSN: 10902473     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2006.07.005     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Arrow K.J. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Nelson R.R. (Ed). The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors (1962), Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton 609-625
2. Beggs A.W. The licensing of patents under asymmetric information. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 10 (1992) 171-191
3. Bousquet A., Cremer H., Ivaldi M., and Wolkowicz M. Risk sharing in licensing. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 16 (1998) 535-554
4. Caballero-Sanz F., Moner-Colonques R., and Sempere-Monerris J.J. Optimal licensing in a spatial model. Ann. Econ. Statist. 66 (2002) 257-279
5. Choi J.P. Technology transfer with moral hazard. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 19 (2001) 249-266
6. Dasgupta P., and Stiglitz J. Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity. Econ. J. 90 (1980) 266-293
7. Faulí-Oller R., and Sandonís J. Welfare reducing licensing. Games Econ. Behav. 41 (2002) 192-205
8. Filippini L. Licensing contract in a Stackelberg model. Manchester Sch. 73 (2005) 582-598
9. Gallini N.T., and Winter R.A. Licensing in the theory of innovation. RAND J. Econ. 16 (1985) 237-252
10. Gallini N.T., and Wright B.D. Technology transfer under asymmetric information. RAND J. Econ. 21 (1990) 147-160
11. Kabiraj T. Patent licensing in a leadership structure. Manchester Sch. 72 (2004) 188-205
12. Kabiraj T. Technology transfer in a Stackelberg structure: Licensing contracts and welfare. Manchester Sch. 73 (2005) 1-28
13. Kamien M.I. Patent licensing. In: Aumann R.J., and Hart S. (Eds). Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications (1992), Elsevier Science/North-Holland, Amsterdam 331-354 (Chapter 11)
14. Kamien M.I., Oren S.S., and Tauman Y. Optimal licensing of cost-reducing innovation. J. Math. Econ. 21 (1992) 483-508
15. Kamien M.I., and Tauman Y. The private value of a patent: A game theoretic analysis. Z. Nationalökon. 4 Supplement (1984) 93-118
16. Kamien M.I., and Tauman Y. Fees versus royalties and the private value of a patent. Quart. J. Econ. 101 (1986) 471-491
17. Kamien M.I., and Tauman Y. Patent licensing: The inside story. Manchester Sch. 70 (2002) 7-15
18. Katz M.L., and Shapiro C. On the licensing of innovations. RAND J. Econ. 16 (1985) 504-520
19. Katz M.L., and Shapiro C. How to license intangible property. Quart. J. Econ. 101 (1986) 567-589
20. Katz M.L., and Shapiro C. R and D rivalry with licensing or imitation. Amer. Econ. Rev. 77 (1987) 402-420
21. Lee T., and Wilde L.L. Market structure and innovation: A reformulation. Quart. J. Econ. 94 (1980) 429-436
22. Liao C.H., and Sen D. Subsidy in licensing: Optimality and welfare implications. Manchester Sch. 73 (2005) 281-299
23. Loury G.C. Market structure and innovation. Quart. J. Econ. 93 (1979) 395-410
24. Macho-Stadler I., Martinez-Giralt X., and Pérez-Castrillo J.D. The role of information in licensing contract design. Res. Pol. 25 (1996) 25-41
25. Macho-Stadler I., and Pérez-Castrillo J.D. Contracts de licence et asymétrie d'information. Ann. Econ. Statist. 24 (1991) 189-208
26. Marjit S. On a non-cooperative theory of technology transfer. Econ. Letters 33 (1990) 293-298
27. Mukherjee A. Technology transfer with commitment. Econ. Theory 17 (2001) 345-369
28. Mukherjee A., and Balasubramanian N. Technology transfer in a horizontally differentiated product market. Res. Econ. 55 (2001) 257-274
29. Muto S. The possibility of relicensing and patent protection. Eur. Econ. Rev. 31 (1987) 927-945
30. Muto S. On licensing policies in Bertrand competition. Games Econ. Behav. 5 (1993) 257-267
31. Poddar, S., Sinha, U.B., 2002. The role of fixed fee and royalty in patent licensing. Working paper No. 0211. Department of Economics, National University of Singapore
32. Poddar S., and Sinha U.B. On patent licensing in spatial competition. Econ. Rec. 80 (2004) 208-218
33. Rockett K. The quality of licensed technology. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 8 (1990) 559-574
34. Rostoker M.D. A survey of corporate licensing. IDEA: J. Law Tech. 24 (1984) 59-92
35. Saracho A.I. Patent licensing under strategic delegation. J. Econ. Manage. Strategy 11 (2002) 225-251
36. Schmitz P.W. On monopolistic licensing strategies under asymmetric information. J. Econ. Theory 106 (2002) 177-189
37. Sempere-Monerris J.J., and Vannetelbosch V.J. The relevance of bargaining for the licensing of a cost-reducing innovation. Bull. Econ. Res. 53 (2001) 101-115
38. Sen D. Monopoly profit in a Cournot oligopoly. Econ. Bull. 4 (2002) 1-6
39. Sen D. Fee versus royalty reconsidered. Games Econ. Behav. 53 (2005) 141-147
40. Sen D. On the coexistence of different licensing schemes. Int. Rev. Econ. Finance 14 (2005) 393-413
41. Shapiro C. Patent licensing and R&D rivalry. Amer. Econ. Rev., Pap. Proc. 75 (1985) 25-30
42. Stamatopoulos, G., Tauman, Y., 2005. Licensing of a quality-improving innovation. Working paper. Stony Brook University
43. Taylor C., and Silberstone Z. The Economic Impact of the Patent System (1973), Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge
44. Wang X.H. Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model. Econ. Letters 60 (1998) 55-62
45. Wang X.H. Fee versus royalty licensing in a differentiated Cournot duopoly. J. Econ. Bus. 54 (2002) 253-266
46. Wang X.H., and Yang B.Z. On licensing under Bertrand competition. Australian Econ. Pap. 38 (1999) 106-119
47. Yanagawa, N., Wada, T., 2000. Post-contracting innovations and contingent payment scheme in patent licensing contracts. Working paper. International Society for New Institutional Economics