Published: 4/6/16Publication: LexologyWhether standard essential patents holders (hereinafter “SEP holders”) who have made commitments to license the patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms (“FRAND commitments”) to standard-setting organizations should be granted injunctive relief and in what situation the granting of the injunctive relief should be restricted are hot topics [...]
Published: 4/5/17Publication: IPKat"Fresh off the press is today's decision from Mr Justice Birss in Unwired Planet v Huawei [2017] EWHC 711 - the latest judgment in the Unwired Planet cases (see previous Kat reports here). Clocking in at a cool 166 pages, the decision is the first time the High Court has not only assessed whether offers [...]
Published: 4/4/17Publication: CNET"Qualcomm has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commission that accuses the wireless chip maker of maintaining its market dominance through anticompetitive behavior. The company's motion, filed Monday in the US District Court in San Jose, California, contends that the FTC's [...]
Published: 4/1/17Publication: National Law Review"The Hague District Court in the Netherlands rejected a claim brought by smartphone maker Archos alleging that Philips had abused its dominant position during negotiations concerning licenses on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms for standard essential patents (SEPs). Archos S.A. v. Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Dist. Ct. of [...]
Published: 4/1/16Publication: Financial ExpressTimes change, and so do business models. This is especially true for licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). What was an excellent business practice in the 1990s is not a viable business strategy today. The cross-licensing rates of those days cannot be used as a benchmark today. If [...]
Published: 4/1/16Publication: LexologyA number of national competition agencies have recently been reviewing their IPR guidelines giving rise to some interesting trends and developments… On 31 March 2016 the Canadian Competition Bureau released updated IPR Enforcement Guidelines (the “Canadian IPR Guidelines”) (see here for a press release and here for the Enforcement Guidelines themselves). The main revisions [...]
Published: 4/1/13This article acknowledges that hold-up can lead to inefficient standard setting and defines FRAND through the application of economic principles. It explains that “[t]he reduction in alternatives that results from the adoption of the standard can raise the maximum royalty rate that the patent holder demands (ex post) above [...]
Published: 3/12/16Publication: Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)logJorge L. Contreras, “Private Ordering or Public Law? The Legal Character of Technical Standard Setting”: Private ordering structure arises when public enforcement mechanisms are unavailable (crime syndicates, rural settings) or less efficient/logical (credit rating, accounting standards). Standard setting: collaboration among competitors; technical focus, not legal; ideally [...]
Published: 3/10/16Publication: Comparative Patent RemediesOn Wednesday, March 15 at 2 p.m. EST, the IPO Chat Channel is presenting a webinar titledAntitrust in Asia: SEPs and New IP Guidelines in China, Korea, and Japan. Here is a link to the webpage, and here is a description of the webinar: For all [...]
Published: 3/10/16Publication: LexologyIn recent years, the term 'standard-essential patent' has become a buzzword in Chinese antitrust practice. Standard-essential patents raise numerous issues, including with regard to the application boundaries of the Anti-monopoly Law, the balance between public and private rights and the future direction of enforcement and judicial practice. The [...]