國立高雄大學圖資館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

圖資館首頁

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 = Essays on Licensing...

國立高雄大學應用經濟學系碩士班

技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 = Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : 單行本
並列題名:	Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade
作者:	梁育維,
其他團體作者:	國立高雄大學
出版地:	[高雄市]
出版者:	撰者;
出版年:	2012[民101]
面頁冊數:	41面圖，表格 : 30公分;
標題:	授權金
標題:	License royalty
電子資源:	http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/29470113734346251648
附註:	參考書目：面34
附註:	內容為英文
摘要註:	第二章在三種授權方法下擁有專利權的公司會偏好選擇技術持股授權方法，來使其利潤極大。同時發現，若授權後選擇單位授權及固定費用授權利潤都為零。對消費者而言，若市場規模減去邊際成本過小時，不能確定何種方法較優；若介於某一範圍之間則單位授權方法優於固定費用授權,而固定費用授權優於技術持股授權方法; 若等於某一值時則技術持股授權與固定費用授權無異，但都比單位授權方法較差;若過大時, 則單位授權優於技術持股授權且同時技術持股授權優於固定收費授權方法。第三章延續第一篇架構增加研究及發展變數且內生求解後，主要證明擁有專利權的廠商其排序偏好則為選擇技術持股授權、固定費用授權與單位授權。而就被授權廠商來說，其排序偏好則為固定費用授權、單位授權與技術持股授權方法。以消費者及社會福利而言，單位授權方法會優於其他方法。第四章証明在最適關稅下，對於在兩國生產的廠商及在市場規模小且擁有較高生產力國的消費者而言，平行貿易是有利可圖的。但對市場規模大且低生產力國的消費者而言平行貿易有可能是無利可圖的。 Licensing is an increasing trend of industrial economy. Licensing usually uses two methods: per-unit royalty and fixed fee royalty. It hardly ever mentioned cross ownership. In this thesis, a duopoly model with ex-ante productivity difference is based for exploring the choice of endogenous R&D and licensing contract that includes per-unit royalty, fixed fee royalty and cross ownership. In addition, the parallel trade in a duopoly model with ex-ante productivity difference is used to analyze the welfare effect of parallel trade.In Chapter 2, we show that the licenser prefers cross ownership to other licensing methods. If the market size is too small, priority of licensing cannot be certain. If the market size is in a parametric range, consumers prefer per-unit royalty to fixed fee royalty and cross ownership; however, if the market size is too large, consumers prefer per-unit royalty to cross ownership and cross ownership is superior to fixed fee royalty. In Chapter 3, we show that the innovator still prefers cross ownership to fixed fee royalty and fixed fee royalty is superior to per-unit royalty. However, the licensee prefers fixed fee royalty to per-unit royalty and per-unit royalty is superior to cross ownership. Per-unit royalty method is the best from consumer surplus and social welfare perspectives.In chapter 4, we show that under optimal tariff, parallel trade is profitable and consumers are better-off in a country with a small market size and high productivity. However, consumers’ welfare is uncertain in a country with a large market size and low productivity.

技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 = Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade
梁, 育維

技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 = Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade / 梁育維撰 - [高雄市] : 撰者, 2012[民101]. - 41面 ; 圖，表格 ; 30公分.
參考書目：面34內容為英文.
授權金License royalty

技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 = Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade
LDR:03948nam0a2200289 450 001 346250
005 20170214093048.0
009 346250
010 0 $b 精裝
010 0 $b 平裝
100 $a 20170214d2012 k y0chiy05 e
101 1 $a eng $d chi $d eng
102 $a tw
105 $a ak am 000yy
200 1 $a 技術授權與平行交易課題之研究 $d Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade $z eng $f 梁育維撰
210 $a [高雄市] $c 撰者 $d 2012[民101]
215 0 $a 41面 $c 圖，表格 $d 30公分
300 $a 參考書目：面34
300 $a 內容為英文
314 $a 指導教授：王鳳生博士
328 $a 碩士論文--國立高雄大學應用經濟學系碩士班
330 $a 第二章在三種授權方法下擁有專利權的公司會偏好選擇技術持股授權方法，來使其利潤極大。同時發現，若授權後選擇單位授權及固定費用授權利潤都為零。對消費者而言，若市場規模減去邊際成本過小時，不能確定何種方法較優；若介於某一範圍之間則單位授權方法優於固定費用授權,而固定費用授權優於技術持股授權方法; 若等於某一值時則技術持股授權與固定費用授權無異，但都比單位授權方法較差;若過大時, 則單位授權優於技術持股授權且同時技術持股授權優於固定收費授權方法。第三章延續第一篇架構增加研究及發展變數且內生求解後，主要證明擁有專利權的廠商其排序偏好則為選擇技術持股授權、固定費用授權與單位授權。而就被授權廠商來說，其排序偏好則為固定費用授權、單位授權與技術持股授權方法。以消費者及社會福利而言，單位授權方法會優於其他方法。第四章証明在最適關稅下，對於在兩國生產的廠商及在市場規模小且擁有較高生產力國的消費者而言，平行貿易是有利可圖的。但對市場規模大且低生產力國的消費者而言平行貿易有可能是無利可圖的。 Licensing is an increasing trend of industrial economy. Licensing usually uses two methods: per-unit royalty and fixed fee royalty. It hardly ever mentioned cross ownership. In this thesis, a duopoly model with ex-ante productivity difference is based for exploring the choice of endogenous R&D and licensing contract that includes per-unit royalty, fixed fee royalty and cross ownership. In addition, the parallel trade in a duopoly model with ex-ante productivity difference is used to analyze the welfare effect of parallel trade.In Chapter 2, we show that the licenser prefers cross ownership to other licensing methods. If the market size is too small, priority of licensing cannot be certain. If the market size is in a parametric range, consumers prefer per-unit royalty to fixed fee royalty and cross ownership; however, if the market size is too large, consumers prefer per-unit royalty to cross ownership and cross ownership is superior to fixed fee royalty. In Chapter 3, we show that the innovator still prefers cross ownership to fixed fee royalty and fixed fee royalty is superior to per-unit royalty. However, the licensee prefers fixed fee royalty to per-unit royalty and per-unit royalty is superior to cross ownership. Per-unit royalty method is the best from consumer surplus and social welfare perspectives.In chapter 4, we show that under optimal tariff, parallel trade is profitable and consumers are better-off in a country with a small market size and high productivity. However, consumers’ welfare is uncertain in a country with a large market size and low productivity.
510 1 $a Essays on Licensing and Parallel Trade $z eng
610 0 $a 授權金 $a 平行貿易 $a 生產力差異
610 1 $a License royalty $a Parallel trade $a Productivity spread
681 $a 008M/0019 $b 301206 3302 $v 2007年版
700 1 $a 梁 $b 育維 $4 撰 $3 576456
712 0 2 $a 國立高雄大學 $b 應用經濟學系碩士班 $3 353959
801 0 $a tw $b NUK $c 20121107 $g CCR
856 7 $z 電子資源 $2 http $u http://handle.ncl.edu.tw/11296/ndltd/29470113734346251648