国外标准必要专利许可费计算方法对中国专利开放许可制度设计的启示

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (6066 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract In order to promote the implementation and application of patents,in the Patent Law (draft amendment),it newly establishes a patent license of right system as a major highlight of the revision of this patent law.It is clear that the license payment method and standard are the conditions for the patentee to implement the license of right.However,it is a matter of ambiguity.Therefore,it is necessary to study this to enhance the operability and efficiency of the patent system.There are many similarities between the pre-approval conditions for license of right and the license fees and payment methods for standard essential patents.On the basis of studying the criteria for determining the standard use fee for standard patents in Europe and the United States,the article puts forward suggestions for further improving the conditions for pre-approval conditions for license of right.

Key words： Patent License of right Standard essential patent License fee

Received: 12 March 2019

PACS:

G306

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Liu Yunhua
	Zeng Wen

Cite this article:

Liu Yunhua,Zeng Wen. Enlightenment of the Calculation Method of Foreign Standard Essential Patent License Fees to the Design of License of Right in China[J]. , 2019, 0(12): 108-115.

URL:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/ OR http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/Y2019/V0/I12/108

[1]刘鑫,余翔.标准必要专利与我国企业策略研究[J].知识产权,2014 (11):59-63.
[2]Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC[EB/OL]. (2006-03-18)[2019-02-18].https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/Common_Policy.htm?nodeid=6344764&vernum=-2.
[3]Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC:version4.0[EB/OL]. (2018-11-02)[2019-02-18].https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/Common_Guidelines.pdf?nodeid=6295394&vernum=-2.
[4]张俊艳,孙佳,马佳钰,等.标准必要专利的国际比较及其许可收入分析[EB/OL]. (2016-10-22)[2019-02-28].http://www.sipo.gov.cn/gwyzscqzlssgzbjlxkybgs/zlyj_zlbgs/1062633.htm.
[5]付强,张敬娟,王丽君.ANSI认可标准制定组织以及美国国家标准批准程序[J].标准科学,2014 (7):81-84.
[6]杨正宇.美国国家标准学会专利许可政策演进考察[J].知识产权,2018 (3):88-96.
[7]Microsoft Corp.v.Motorola,Inc.,Case No.C10-1823JLR (W.D.Wash.Nov.12,2013)[EB/OL].[2019-02-28].https://www.essentialpatentblog.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/64/2013/04/2013.04.25-D.E.-681-Findings-of-Fact-and-Conclusions-of-Law-setting-RAND-royalty1.pdf.
[8]刘德旺.标准必要专利 (SEPs)许可费确定研究[D].济南:山东大学,2018.
[9]朱翔华.欧盟委员会 “关于标准必要专利的欧盟办法”对我国的启示[J].标准科学,2018 (6):27-32.
[10]谭袁.欧盟委员会:关于标准必要专利的欧盟路径 (译文)[J].竞争政策研究,2017 (6):92-102.
[11]胡洪.司法视野下的FRAND原则——兼评华为诉IDC案[J].科技与法律,2014 (5):884-901.
[12]Unwied Planet International Ltd.V.Huawei Technologies Co.Ltd,Royal Courts of JHP[EB/OL].[2019-02-28].https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/unwired-planet-v-huawei-20170405.pdf.
[13]In re Innovation IP Ventures,LLC Patent Litig.,MDL 2303,2013WL 5593609 (N.D.I11.Oct.3,2013)[EB/OL].[2019-02-28].https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilndce/1:2011cv09308/263987/975/0.pdf?ts=1411533687.
[14]TCL Commc′n Tech.Holdings,Ltd.v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson,Case No:SACV 14-341 JVS (DFMx) (C.D.Cal.Dec.21,2017)[EB/OL].[2019-02-28].http://home.tm.tue.nl/rbekkers/TCL_v_Ericsson_Decision.pdf.