美国标准必要专利政策评述

doi:10.12267/j.issn.2096-5931.2023.03.001

信息通信技术与政策 ›› 2023, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3): 1-9.doi: 10.12267/j.issn.2096-5931.2023.03.001

专家论坛下一篇

美国标准必要专利政策评述

Comments on the US standards-essential patents policy

易继明

北京大学,北京 100871

收稿日期:2023-03-08 出版日期:2023-03-25 发布日期:2023-04-06
作者简介:
易继明,北京大学法学院教授、北京大学国际知识产权研究中心主任,主要从事民法基础理论、民法典、财产权、知识产权及科技法学等方面的研究工作。

YI Jiming

Peking University,Beijing 100871, China

Received:2023-03-08 Online:2023-03-25 Published:2023-04-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2021年12月,美国司法部、国家标准与技术研究所和专利商标局共同发布了《关于受自愿F/RAND承诺约束的标准必要专利许可谈判和补救措施的政策声明草案》,向公众征求意见。其主要内容,由善意许可谈判框架与受F/RAND承诺约束的标准必要专利侵权救济措施两部分组成。结合2019年政策声明,详细梳理2021年政策声明草案的要点,并对草案内容予以评述。

关键词: 标准必要专利政策, 善意许可谈判, 侵权救济措施, 述评

Abstract:

The Draft Policy Statement on Licensing Negotiations and Remedies for Standards-Essential Patents Subject to Voluntary F/RAND Commitments was released by the US Department of Justice (DOJ), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office for public comments in December 2021. Its main content consists of two parts: a good-faith licensing negotiation framework and remedies for the infringement of standards-essential patents that are subject to a RAND or F/RAND licensing commitment. Based on the 2019 policy statement, this paper lists the key points of the 2021 draft policy statement in detail and comments on the draft content.

Key words: standards-essential patents policy, good-faith licensing negotiation, infringement remedies, comment

中图分类号:

D923.4

易继明. 美国标准必要专利政策评述[J]. 信息通信技术与政策, 2023, 49(3): 1-9.

YI Jiming. Comments on the US standards-essential patents policy[J]. Information and Communications Technology and Policy, 2023, 49(3): 1-9.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文:

http://ictp.caict.ac.cn/CN/10.12267/j.issn.2096-5931.2023.03.001

http://ictp.caict.ac.cn/CN/Y2023/V49/I3/1

参考文献 14

[1]	DOJ. “Telegraph Road”: Incentivizing innovation at the intersection of patent and AntitrustLaw[EB/OL]. (2018-12-07)[2023-03-20]. https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/file/1117686/download.
[2]	USPTO, DOJ, NIST. Policy statement on remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2019-12-19)[2023-03-01]. https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/SEP%20policy%20statement%20signed.pdf.
[3]	DOJ. Public comments welcome on draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2021-12-06)[2023-03-01]. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/public-comments-welcome-draft-policy-statement-licensing-negotiations-and-remedies-standards.
[4]	USPTO, DOJ, NIST. Draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2021-12-06)[2023-03-01]. https://www.justice.gov/atr/page/file/1453471/download.
[5]	Supreme Court of the United States. See eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388[Z], 2006.
[6]	InterDigital, Inc. Comments on the december 6, 2021 draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2022-02-07)[2023-03-01]. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/ATR-2021-0001-0155.
[7]	Apple Inc. Apple Inc.’s response to the request for comments on the draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2022-02-07)[2023-03-01]. https://www.regulations.gov/comme-nt/ATR-2021-0001-0157.
[8]	Cisco Systems, Inc. In response to draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2022-02-04)[2023-03-01]. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/ATR-2021-0001-0142.
[9]	Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. Comments of continental automotive on draft policy statement on licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments[EB/OL]. (2022-02-04)[2023-03-01]. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/ATR-2021-0001-0137.
[10]	易继明. 禁止权利滥用原则在知识产权领域中的适用[J]. 中国法学, 2013(4):39-52.
[11]	李丹. 滥用标准必要专利的反垄断法规制[J]. 价格理论与实践, 2015(10):30-33.
[12]	易继明, 胡小伟. 标准必要专利实施中的竞争政策:“专利劫持”与“反向劫持”的司法衡量[J]. 陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2021(2):82-95.
[13]	姚兵兵. 论标准必要专利许可谈判良性生态系统改进和完善[J]. 科技·知产财经, 2022(4):36-45.
[14]	易继明, 初萌. 全球专利格局下的中国专利战略[J]. 知识产权, 2019(8):38-56.

美国标准必要专利政策评述

Comments on the US standards-essential patents policy

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 14

相关文章 2

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	赵斌, 罗俊凌, 刘益嘉, 张婷婷. 数字电力知识产权交易管理平台设计与研究[J]. 信息通信技术与政策, 2023, 49(3): 18-23.
[2]	苏志甫. 数据要素时代商业数据保护的路径选择及规则构建[J]. 信息通信技术与政策, 2022, 48(6): 14-26.