¬ã°Q¤é´Á

2009¦~2¤ë21¤é10:20 ~ 13:00

¬ã°Q¦aÂI

¥x¤jªÀ·|¬ì¾Ç°|¹q¤Æ±Ð«Ç

ÃD¥Ø

The relevance of bargaining for the licensing of a cost-reducing innovation

§@ªÌ

Jose J. Sempere Monerris and Vincent J. Vannetelbosch

¤åÄm¥X³B

Bulletin of Economic Research 53(2), 2001,101-115

³ø§i¤H

©P¦Bº½

°Ñ¥[¤H­û

¶ÀÂE¡BªL¿P²Q¡BÁé嚖³®¡B±ç¤åºa¡B±i¥Á©¾¡B¤B­i¤¯¡B±iÞ³´@¡B°¨¹D¡B³¯Þ·«Ì¡BÀ¹Ã¢®x¡B½²©úªÚ¡BªL¤j¶v¡B§õ´Â¥\¡B´¿ÀRªK¡B³\¦ËÚâ¡B³¯ª÷²±¡B³\¯ÀµØ¡B°ª°ê峯¡B³¯¥É®Ë¡B´^¥¿¯E¡B¤ý¬ý³Ç¡B¤ý¨ÎµX¡BÒ\¥ú»õ¡B©P«~¦°¡B©P¦Bº½¡B¤ý¥ú¥¿¡B³¯§»©ö

ºK­n

In the context of a Cournot duopoly, this paper studies the licensing of a cost-reducing innovation by means of three possible allocation mechanisms: auction, fixed fee, and direct negotiation.

    The main result for this paper is that, once the use of an arbitrary reserve price has been excluded, it is no longer true that auction always yields higher profit to the patentee than a fixed fee. Direct negotiation is superior to both an auction with a non-arbitrary reserve price and a fixed fee. From the social point of view, however, a public agency maximizing either the domestic or the world welfare will recommend licensing through the fixed fee mechanism. Furthermore, the paper main results are qualitatively robust to an alternative specification where the selling of one license bring to the buyer not only advantages in terms of cost but also the advantage of becoming the Stackelberg leader in the market.

³Æµù