Study Of Antitrust Law Issues In Intellectual Property Licensing

The intellectual property right is a private right and an exclusive right. Licensing of intellectual property right is a kind of important way to exercises the right and is benefit to the competition and creativeness. But When be licensing, the holder may abuse the right, to monopolize or attempt to maintain illegally monopolization, which may bring the bane with creative, competition and social public .For avoiding the this kind bane, there will be antimonopoly law in application in necessity controlling the licensing.Foreword introduces the consideration of the case of Sike v. Huawei. The case causes people to think the extension .and monopolization of intellectual property right, knowing the urgent and important of that our country must establish antimonopoly law and controlling the licensing of intellectual property rights.Part I demonstrates the correlation of intellectual property law and antimonopoly law. The intellectual property right is a private right and giving its exclusive right protection has the rationality. The " exterior" problem of the intellectual property right make its law system reasonableness designed, to the exclusive right with necessary restrict, to support the equilibrium of righter and the social public. Licensing of intelligent property right usually is benefit to competition and creativeness. When be licensing, the righter may abuse his right, monopolize or attempt to maintain illegally monopolization, which may bring the bane with creative, competition and social public. The antimonopoly law ruling that may be benefit to competition, creative and social public.Part II analyze the antimonopoly problems of licensing of intellectual property right of relevant abuse market domination. The affirmation of market domination takes into the analysis with the service market from the related product. Owning the intelligent property right oneself is unequal to owning the market domination .The behavior of abusing market domination licensing primarily contain monopoly licenses and standardize to license, refusal to license, discrimination licenses and predatory licenses. The monopoly of the singly bothparties' licensing is usually legal. If many monopolies licensing is used to partition the market with the customer, they are illegal. The cross-licensing and pool agreement are two kinds of standardize to license. When the technique standard patent in the system repairs with each other, blocks with each other, not to compete, because of its can't limit the competition, as a result they are legal; Whereas, if they are competition of, not to block with each other, they will limit the competition and are illegal. Compulsory license and antimonopoly law are a valid way to guard against lighter to abuse the right to refuse to license. The pure discrimination licenses and predatory licenses are hard to be affirmed, but with merchandise of relevant intelligent property right trade price bias or predatory against the rival come from the market, they breach antimonopoly law.Part III interprets the antimonopoly problems of restrict license. The majority of restrict licensing of intellectual property right are belong to vertical restriction agreement and usually apply the principle of rationality analysis. At concrete application rationality principle, already extensively accepted is three standards that GTE Sylvania case produce in U.S. Restrict licensing primarily contain tie-ins, return to teach, the price limits, usage region or realms limit etc. The tie-ins with market domination are usually illegal, but have the "technique necessity" rule exempt from the term, affirming the "technique necessity" through the rationality principle. The monopoly returns to teach and return to teach unilaterally, disadvantage in encourage to creative, disadvantage in competition, go against the fair and fair principle, and is illegal. But the of mutual benefit double faces of returning is legal. Limit the price item, whether it is horizontal agreement or vertical agreement, is illegal, but no compulsory price guidin...