On The Counterplea Of Claim Of Injunction For Standard Essential Patents

In order to improve production efficiency,expand market,adjust product structure and realize rational production,the standardization of all countries in the world has developed rapidly,and the standard system has been constructed in all walks of life.Among them,especially in the high-tech industry and communication industry,enterprises have a strong sense of technology patents,so at every level in the standardization process,are usually included in the patent technology,the concept of standard essential patents came into being.The standard is more about public welfare,its purpose is to be used as much as possible,and let users and consumers benefit from it.The preservation of standard essential patents must balance the benefits of"public" and "private",that is,the balance of interests between subjects involved.The requirement for the implementation of the standard essential patent injunction is a judicial system for the standard patent holder to safeguard his legitimate interests without infringement,it is also one of the major issues affecting the balance of interests among the subjects involved.How does not harm the public in the protection of private interest at the same time,has been the problem that practical and academic circles are exploring.By means of interest measurement,claim method and comparative study,mainly from three aspects to solve the problem completely:one is to study the possibility of the existence of the counterplea in the patent system of the injunction,and to demonstrate the possible counterplea in three dimensions and nine cases,and to prove it through judicial practice;the second is to prove the existence of contract relationship between the standard setting organization and the patent holder,and found that the contract relationship is established and is the third party contract;finally,on the basis of the counterplea of the injunction and the contract relationship,the judicial countermeasures of establishing the injunction prohibition principle and the reasonable restriction of the claim for damages are put forward.