| This article starts with the basic theories of standard essential patents and injunctive relief,and answers the two major questions about whether the prohibition applies in the standard patent disputes.On the basis of dialectical analysis of the main reasons for the application of the ban,the article affirms the rationality of the application of the ban on standard-essential patent disputes in China.At the same time,it examines the practice of the United States and the European Union on the ban on standard-essential patent bans,and combines the current judicial situation in China to consider the improvement of China’s standards.The application of the patent ban.The first chapter briefly introduces the basic principles and contents of the standard essential patents and ban system,and explains the inevitable trend of the integration of standards and patents in today’s market and technology environment.In view of the value conflict between the openness of the standard and the monopoly of the patent,and the injunctive relief itself inevitably involves the conflict of interest of the public interest,the right holder and the implementer,it is difficult to simply apply the rules in accordance with the ban.In particular,it sorts out,summarizes and summarizes the practice of applying the ban on standard essential patents,and presents readers with the lack of applicable results due to the lack of detailed norms and unified understanding,which weakens the ban system and the necessary patents.The effect of infringement relief,therefore,is necessary for in-depth analysis and research.The second chapter analyzes the theoretical controversy and judicial status of standard essential patents,and clarifies the main reasons for the disputes on whether the standard necessary patent disputes can be applied and how to apply them,namely:whether it can be based on third-party interest contracts or Implied licensing theory builds a specific contractual relationship under FRAND’s commitment,or negates the ban based on patent hijacking conjecture.At the same time,in view of the current status of the application of the standard necessary patent ban in China,theshortcomings of its rules are pointed out.The third chapter is based on the interpretation of FRAND’s promise and the evaluation of patent hijacking.The reasons include: the essence of FRAND’s commitment is the license obligation of the standard essential patentee.For the above reasons,the ban is applicable.The theory and the evidence are unreasonable.The ban is the balance between patent hijacking and reverse patent hijacking.Patent hijacking conjecture Without empirical support,excessive exaggeration of its risks may lead to reverse patent hijacking;combined with the considerations and analysis of relevant practices in the United States and the European Union,the standard essential patents can apply the ban.The fourth chapter is mainly based on the premise that the standard essential patents can be applied to the ban,based on the current situation of China and combined with the practice of extraterritorial,the targeted solution to the object and situation of the ban in China’s judicial interpretation,the "obvious fault" judgment factors are incomplete,public Problems such as lack of interest considerations and abuse of antitrust laws.It is believed that the patent law and the anti-monopoly law should be coordinated,the application of the ban,the application of the ban,the ban,the definition of the public interest,the recognition of the obvious fault of the right holder and the implementer,and the ban on the effective time.We will improve the rules applicable to the ban on standard essential patents in China,in order to balance the interests of all parties and achieve win-win development. |
