Robert Bosch GmbH
Published: 1/1/12
The U.S. FTC settled charges that a company acquired by Robert Bosch GmbH (Bosch) “reneged on a licensing commitment made to two standard-setting bodies to license its standards-essential patents (‘SEPs’) … on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms (‘FRAND’) by seeking injunctions against willing licensees of those SEPs.” In a statement accompanying the settlement, the FTC explained that “standard setting often displaces the normal competitive process with the collective decision-making of competitors.” According to the agency, “This […]
The Evolving IP Marketplace: Aligning Patent Notice and Remedies with Competition
Published: 3/1/11
In this report, the FTC addressed the issue of a reasonable royalty for FRAND-encumbered SEPs. The Commission recommended that “[c]ourts should cap the royalty at the incremental value of the patented technology over alternatives available at the time the standard was chosen.” The FTC explained that setting the royalty for a FRAND-encumbered SEP “based on the ex ante value of the patented technology at the time the standard is chosen is necessary for consumers to benefit […]
KFTC Action against Qualcomm
Published: 7/23/09
Note: No link available.
On 23 July 2009, the Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) decided to impose final corrective measures and a penalty of USD 227.6 million on Qualcomm for abusing its dominant position in the CDMA technology market. The KFTC determined that Qualcomm excluded its competitors and maintained its very high market share in the Korean CDMA market by engaging in a number of abusive behaviors, such as requiring discriminatory royalty rates and conditional rebates. […]
Letter from Ambassador Michael Froman to ITC Chairman Irving Williamson
Published: 8/3/13
The letter from USTR disapproved of, and thus overturned, the ITC’s decision in a section 337 case to issue (i) an exclusion order that would have prohibited the importation of Apple smartphones and tablets that allegedly infringed a FRAND-encumbered SEP patent owned by Samsung; and (ii) a cease and desist order that would have prevented Apple from engaging in certain activities, such as the sale of these products in the United States.