A Comparative Study On The Determination Of Standard Essential Patentee’s Abuse Of Dominant Market Position

The two industrial revolutions have brought about a major transformation of the social governance model.At the end of the last century,human society has entered a new era with knowledge economy as the core.Patents are closely integrated with technical standards,resulting in Standard Essential Patents(SEPs),which play an important role in promoting scientific and technological innovation and promoting economic progress.Before a patent is included in the standard,the license of the patent is limited by the existence of other competing alternative technologies,but when the patent is included in the standard,the use of the patent in the standard becomes a necessary condition for the manufacture of qualified products.At this time,the necessity and irreplaceability of SEPs may evolve into publicity,coercion and monopoly.This undoubtedly brings unpredictable risks to SEP rights holders to carry out abuses.Therefore,it is of real urgency to solve the problem of identifying standard-essential patent owners who abuse their dominant market position.In this regard,this paper is divided into four chapters to study the problem.Chapter One begins with a clear statement,expounding the necessity of identifying the SEP right holder’s abuse of market dominance.First of all,it discusses what role SEPs play in economic development and scientific and technological innovation as a product of technical standardization combining standards and patents,and the factors for its identification.At the same time,the differences between SEPs and non-SEPs are analyzed to provide a theoretical basis for exploring why SEPs face a greater risk of abuse.Secondly,explore the intellectual property policies stipulated by standard development organizations to prevent the above risks,such as the meaning and characterization of FRAND commitments,and standard-essential patent information disclosure,so as to clarify the source of the complexity of identifying SEP abuse.The second chapter analyzes the abuse of market dominance by SEP owners from the textual level.First,analyze the theoretical connotation and manifestation of "abuse",and clarify its judgment criteria.Afterwards,through a comparison between China and foreign countries on the identification of rights holders’ abuse,the paper summarizes the mainstream identification paths of this issue in different countries and regions at this stage.Specifically,through a comparative analysis of Japan’s "Samsung v.Apple" case and China’s "Huawei v.Samsung" case,this paper studies the view that SEP abuse is identified as a civil rights abuse;In the case of "Common v.Sony",we analyzed the opinions of identifying it as abuse of patent rights;through comparative analysis of the EU’s "Huawei v.ZTE" case and China’s "Huawei v.Interactive Digital" case,we studied the position of identifying it as an abuse of market dominance.Finally,the above paths are summarized and analyzed.From the perspective of behavior,the third chapter analyzes whether the behavior of SEP obligee refusing to license to potential implementers,raising unfairly high prices and seeking injunctive relief is included in the category of abuse of market dominance.In short,mainly by comparing the judicial judgments of the EU,the United States,Germany and China on this issue,master the main principles and systems of refusal of licenses,the calculation basis and methods of FRAND license fees,and the determination elements of injunctive relief.Summarize and analyze the practical attitudes on the identification standards.The fourth chapter learns from the past,studies the shortcomings of China’s system and standards when it is determined that the SEP right holder abuses its dominant market position,and puts forward perfect suggestions for it.Through the above exposition,the commonality and characteristics of the problem identified within and outside the domain are reflected.What is the basis for discussing extraterritorial practices as our country’s reference object? Although the extraterritorial system has inherent merits,the focus of this paper is not to introduce how good extraterritorial practices are,but rather what and how our country should learn.Therefore,in the last chapter,combined with the actual situation of our country,we selectively draw lessons from foreign experience and put forward practical suggestions.With a view to providing assistance in the settlement of disputes involving standard essential patents,in order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises.