Often when negotiating an intellectual property (IP) licence, it can be difficult to know what the payments should be, or how they should be calculated. This information sheet provides a brief summary of the issues that arise when negotiating royalties and licence fees, and some potential solutions to those issues.
Types of royalties and licence fees
Most IP licences will state that the licensee will pay one or more of the following:
What should the royalty rate be?
It is common for the licensee to pay a rolling royalty based on its performance. Royalties are usually either a percentage of the licensee's net sales, or an amount per unit of licensed product sold. But what should that percentage rate or per unit amount be? This is a common question and it's often hard for a party involved in a licensing negotiation to know where to begin. To avoid simply guessing a figure, it's best to apply a royalty valuation methodology. The three main methodologies are summarized below.
The cost approach
The royalty is set at a level that will reimburse the intellectual property owner for its costs over the life of the licence. For obvious reasons, the cost approach has only limited use. It takes no account of the actual market value of the intellectual property.
The comparable market approach
The royalty is based on the royalty charged by others in comparable deals for comparable technologies. The obvious flaw with this approach is that it can be difficult to find current, reliable data for deals and technologies that are truly comparable.
The income approach
The royalty is a share of the profit the licensee will receive as a result of taking the licence and selling the licensed products. The '25% rule' The most common type of income approach is the '25% rule'. This rule of thumb states that the IP owner is entitled to 25% of the licensee's long term pre-tax operating profit made from sales of the licensed products. The 25% share should be expressed in the licence as a percentage of net sales, or a price per unit of licensed product sold. Royalties should never be expressed in the licence as a percentage of profits. Profits can often be manipulated by use of creative accountancy methods. For the '25% rule' to be useful, the intellectual property owner needs to know what the licensee's projected revenues and expenses are. A prudent intellectual property owner will always ask a prospective licensee to submit a business plan that includes revenue and expense projections for the life of the licence. Those projections may need to be discounted to take into account various risks, such as market indifference, technological changes and competition in the market.
Example of the '25% rule'
Party A licenses Party B to translation, reprint and sell a new book. Party A is the author /publisher of the book. Party B's long term projections show that:
Discounting or putting a premium on royalties
Any market-based methodology must also consider factors that might increase or decrease the value of the technology in the hands of the licensee. Such factors include:
Other things to consider