Analysis On The Legal Issues Of Qualcomm Antitrust Case

Intellectual property is the law gives the owner of a monopoly right, under normal circumstances, the intellectual property rights can get immunity of the anti monopoly law, which is by the exclusivity of intellectual property rights and promote innovation, stimulate competition function determined by this. However, intellectual property and antitrust law has a "degree", the subject of any market if beyond the "degree" of the intellectual property that is beyond the degree of anti monopoly law "should be subject to the anti monopoly law regulation, the" degree "is the coordination of intellectual property and antitrust law. Therefore, the use of intellectual property rights is limited, any beyond this limit and limit market competition in use may constitute the abuse of intellectual property, should be regulated by anti-monopoly law. To study on the antitrust regulation of abuse of intellectual property rights in many countries has been very common and in Europe, America and Japan and other developed countries and regions has formed specialized guide. And in our country, antimonopoly law on the abuse of intellectual property rights haven’t formed a system, has not issued a related to guide and 2015 Qualcomm antitrust case again will these issues reflected. Based on Qualcomm antitrust case, through the analysis of Qualcomm’s intellectual property abuse and national development and Reform Commission, the basis for administrative penalty on the abuse of intellectual property rights in China’s anti monopoly regulation put forward some reasonable suggestions, hope to be able to provide the driving force in the system on the market healthy and rapid development.The first chapter of Qualcomm antitrust case background were summarized. Qualcomm case shows that China’s anti monopoly law enforcement began to deeply in the field of intellectual property, and our country’s Antimonopoly in intellectual property law system is still not enough to deal with similar to Qualcomm case on this realistic problem, therefore needs through actual case to summarize the experience and rose to the level of the legal system. It also briefly introduces the used in this paper to the case analysis, comparative analysis and other research methods and innovations.The second chapter mainly summarizes the brief case Qualcomm case and focus. The Qualcomm Corp is a technology intensive company, after decades of development, the level of patent in the field of wireless communications technology has won an overwhelming advantage. But Qualcomm with their own advantage and create the extremely unreasonable high "model, increased high unnecessary costs to other competitors, so that Qualcomm to obtain excess profit from it. So the focus of the high pass case mainly includes the following aspects: the definition of relevant market Qualcomm Corp; identification of high pass market dominance; analysis of Qualcomm abuse of market dominance behavior; analysis of the decision of China Development and Reform Commission the administrative punishment for Qualcomm.The third chapter detailed legal analysis focusing on the problem proposed in the previous chapter. According to the guidelines of China’s anti-monopoly law and the Anti Monopoly Committee on the definition of the relevant market, the definition of the relevant market for Qualcomm mainly from two aspects of commodity market and regional market, so the use of alternative demand and supply alternative method the relevant market analysis shows that Qualcomm is defined as wireless standard essential patent licensing market and baseband chip sales market. And in these two markets, Qualcomm in the technology market in the region market for Patent Licensee in the country; Qualcomm chip market business covers the world, so the regional market for the global market. Identified in Qualcomm abuse of market dominance, high according to the administrative punishment decision of China’s development and Reform Commission, Qualcomm abuse of intellectual property mainly in two : standard essential patent licensing market and wireless communication terminal baseband chip market. In the patent licensing market, Qualcomm licensing fees to use dominant wireless standard essential patents expired, the licensee will require patent license tying free reverse and non-standard essential patents; in the baseband chip market, Qualcomm mainly for additional unreasonable condition. Through the analysis of the above aspects of the determination, reflecting the system of our country is not perfect, China’s current legal norms the main parts of the abuse of intellectual property rights in many laws, has not formed a complete system, as developed countries have enacted anti-monopoly law norms Guide abuse related intellectual property. Therefore, in the punishment that Qualcomm Corp mainly need to spend a lot of manpower, material resources, the efficiency is very low, the conclusion is not strong persuasive. The establishment and perfection of anti-monopoly abuse of intellectual property system is imminent, the most effective way is to follow the guidelines of developed countries in Europe and America.Chapter four mainly according to Qualcomm case reflects the problems, from the four aspects proposed on intellectual property right of our country antitrust law from the aspect of improvement suggestions. Namely, to establish system; introduction of relevant guidelines; rich concept system; to establish a civil action and the administrative punishment of the docking system.