Suchergebnisse

The jurisprudence on standard-essential patents (SEPs) has evolved substantially in the last few years, particularly in the European jurisdictions, where EU courts have dealt with certain FRAND and antitrust issues in an unambiguous and novel manner. The 2015 landmark judgement in Huawei v. ZTE by the Court of Justice of the European Union brought clarity in understanding 'unwilling licensee' and laid down terms under which the holder of a FRAND-compliant SEP can seek injunctive relief that does not amount to an abuse of its dominant position. Four important judgements in Germany followed, where the regional courts have applied the CJEU principles laid down in Huawei and brought further clarity on the same. This paper analyzes the contentious issue of injunctive relief as a remedy for infringement of standard essential patents under FRAND licensing terms. In this direction, the first part of this paper evaluates four cases in which the EU courts granted injunctions for SEPs compliant with FRAND royalty obligations under the Huawei framework. The second half of this paper updates the reader about developments in the Indian FRAND jurisprudence, and offers an analysis, along with some suggestions.

The jurisprudence on standard-essential patents (SEPs) has evolved substantially in the last few years, particularly in the European jurisdictions, where EU courts have dealt with certain FRAND and antitrust issues in an unambiguous and novel manner. The 2015 landmark judgement in Huawei v. ZTE by the Court of Justice of the European Union brought clarity in understanding 'unwilling licensee' and laid down terms under which the holder of a FRAND-compliant SEP can seek injunctive relief that does not amount to an abuse of its dominant position. Four important judgements in Germany followed, where the regional courts have applied the CJEU principles laid down in Huawei and brought further clarity on the same. This paper analyzes the contentious issue of injunctive relief as a remedy for infringement of standard essential patents under FRAND licensing terms. In this direction, the first part of this paper evaluates four cases in which the EU courts granted injunctions for SEPs compliant with FRAND royalty obligations under the Huawei framework. The second half of this paper updates the reader about developments in the Indian FRAND jurisprudence, and offers an analysis, along with some suggestions.

This open access book presents global perspectives and developments within the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, and discusses the bearing they have on policy initiatives that are relevant to the larger digital technology and communications industry. Drawing on key developments in India, the USA, UK, EU, and China, it explores whether key jurisdictions need to adopt a different legal and policy approach to address the unique concerns that have emerged within the technology-intensive industries. The book also examines the latest law and policy debates surrounding patents and competition in these regions. Initiating a multi-faceted discussion, the book enables readers to gain a comprehensive understanding of complex legal and policy issues that are beginning to emerge around the globe.

This open access edited book captures the complexities and conflicts arising at the interface of intellectual property rights (IPR) and competition law. To do so, it discusses four specific themes: (a) policies governing functioning of standard setting organizations (SSOs), transparency and incentivising future innovation; (b) issue of royalties for standard essential patents (SEPs) and related disputes; (c) due process principles, procedural fairness and best practices in competition law; and (d) coherence of patent policies and consonance with competition law to support innovation in new technologies. Many countries have formulated policies and re-oriented their economies to foster technological innovation as it is seen as a major source of economic growth. At the same time, there have been tensions between patent laws and competition laws, despite the fact that both are intended to enhance consumer welfare. In this regard, licensing of SEPs has been debated extensively, although in most instances, innovators and implementers successfully negotiate licensing of SEPs. However, there have been instances where disagreements on royalty base and royalty rates, terms of licensing, bundling of patents in licenses, pooling of licenses have arisen, and this has resulted in a surge of litigation in various jurisdictions and also drawn the attention of competition/anti-trust regulators. Further, a lingering lack of consensus among scholars, industry experts and regulators regarding solutions and techniques that are apposite in these matters across jurisdictions has added to the confusion. This book looks at the processes adopted by the competition/anti-trust regulators to apply the principles of due process and procedural fairness in investigating abuse of dominance cases against innovators.