Skip to main content

Platforms with Restrictive Licensing

  • 320 Accesses

Abstract

Two-sided platforms coordinate two types of users in order to increase the value of the whole system surrounding the platform. Users of a platform have different outside opportunities, and these influence their behavior on the platform. Platforms often limit these outside projects through restrictive licensing agreements. These are often thought to reflect market power and a foreclosure motivation, but it shows that they can be a way of managing the “quality commons” aspect of a platform. This chapter analyzes a platform where all component developers produce two kinds of quality—inside quality for their offerings on the platform and outside quality on their outside project. It shows that there are cases where restrictive licensing agreements that shut down the outside projects can increase social welfare, while in other cases they reduce social welfare. The reason is that if consumers and the platform value components inside quality enough, all agents prefer to be protected from low-quality behavior, even at the cost of giving up outside projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-40601-1_10
  • Chapter length: 18 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-40601-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    One piece of evidence for quality commons in shopping malls is that rental contracts commonly include “cotenancy” clauses that result in reduced rent if other tenants leave the mall. See, e.g., Fung (2018).

References

  • Armstrong, M. 2006. Competition in Two-Sided Markets. RAND Journal of Economics 37: 668–691.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, K. 2010. Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control. Management Science 56 (10): 1849–1872.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, K., and A. Hagiu. 2009. Platform Rules: Regulating the Ecosystem Around a Multi-Sided Platform. In Platforms, Markets and Innovation, ed. Annabelle Gawer. Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, J., and N. Gandal. 1992. Network Effects, Software Provision, and Standardization. The Journal of Industrial Economics 40 (1): 85–103.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, E. 2018. Sears Closing Stores Is a Blessing for Some Landlords, a Curse for Others. Wall Street Journal, October 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, R.J., and M.L. Katz. 2011. Efficient Division of Profits from Complementary Innovations. International Journal of Industrial Organization 29 (4): 443–454.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hagiu, A. 2006. Pricing and Commitment by Two-Sided Platforms. RAND Journal of Economics 37: 720–737.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hagiu, A. 2009. Quantity vs. Quality and Exclusion by Two-Sided Platforms. papers.ssrn.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagiu, A., and J. Wright. 2018. Platform Minimum Requirements. Working Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogendorn, C., and S. Yuen. 2009. Platform Competition with ‘Must-Have’ Components. Journal of Industrial Economics 57 (2): 294–318.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, M., and C. Shapiro. 1985. Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility. The American Economic Review 75 (3): 424–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rey, P., and T. Vergé. 2008. Economics of Vertical Restraints. In Handbook of Antitrust Economics, ed. Paolo Buccirossi, 353–390. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochet, J., and J. Tirole. 2003. Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets. Journal of the European Economic Association 1 (4): 990–1029.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schuett, F. 2012. Field-of-Use Restrictions in Licensing Agreements. International Journal of Industrial Organization 30 (5): 403–416.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stennek, J. 2014. Exclusive Quality—Why Exclusive Distribution May Benefit the TV-Viewers. Information Economics and Policy 26: 42–57.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christiaan Hogendorn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hogendorn, C. (2020). Platforms with Restrictive Licensing. In: Alleman, J., Rappoport, P., Hamoudia, M. (eds) Applied Economics in the Digital Era. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40601-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40601-1_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-40600-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-40601-1

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)