| With the development of economic globalization,the combination of standard and patent is becoming more and more close,and more and more essential patents technology is incorporated into the standards to form the Standard Essential Patents(SEP),However,Standard Essential Patents also expand the market forces in the relevant technology licensing market and the related product market.When the patentee has a dominant position in the relevant market,it is very likely to carry out unfair and high-priced licensing behavior and damage the market competition.In recent years,there have been a large number of cases of unfair and high-priced licensing fees for SEP holders using antitrust regulations.May 21,2019,The United States District made a verdict in FTC v.Qualcomm,which found the abuse of its dominant position,including unfair and high-priced licensing behavior,violated anti-monopoly law and issued five bans to Qualcomm.The five bans could radically reverse qualcomm’s business model and then curb unfair and high-priced licensing behavior,so the ruling has attracted a lot of academic attention.Although the appeal court has suspended two injunctions of the court,the district court has explained the analysis process of finding that the unfair and high-priced licensing behavior is illegal in detail,which is of great reference and significance to the regulation of this behavior in our country,so this case deserves deep analysis.This paper analyzes the controversial focus of whether qualcomm carries out unfair and high-priced licensing behavior in this case,and finds the deficiency in regulating this behavior in our country by comparing the similarities and differences between our country’s “Huawei vs.IDC” and our country’s “Qualcomm antitrust case”,Based on this,this paper tries to find out the experience that can be used for reference from this case,and puts forward some enlightenments of this case to the relevant antitrust regulation in our country.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper is mainly composed of the following three parts:Part Ⅰ: Brief introduction and dispute summary of this case.First of all,introduce the basic situation of Qualcomm in patent license and chip sales,and explain the trial process and results,and then summarize the focus of the case about the unfair and high-priced licensing behavior: how to define the relevant market;whether Qualcomm has a dominant position in the relevant market;whether Qualcomm has committed the unfair high price license behavior illegal.Part Ⅱ: Analysis of key points of dispute in this case.For the three disputes raised in part I,part II will be resolved one by one.First,regarding the definition of the relevant market,this case adopts alternative analysis method,supplemented by the result verification of the SSNIP,which defines Qualcomm’s unfair and high-priced licensing behavior within the relevant chip market,including the CDMA chip market and the high-level LTE chip market.Secondly,there are obvious barriers to entry in the above related markets,and competitors lack the ability to increase production in the short term,coupled with Qualcomm’s dominant market share in the relevant market,so the court adjudicated that Qualcomm has a dominant position in the relevant market.Finally,through a comprehensive analysis of the conduct facts,anti-competitive effects and anti-competitive intentions,the court found that the act violated the anti-monopoly law.Part Ⅲ: The enlightenment of this case to our country’s SEP regulates the right holder to carry out unfair and high-priced licensing behavior.In the process of comparing and analyzing the relevant cases at home and abroad,this paper draws some enlightenments.First,our country can refine the specific rules to regulate SEP holders carry out unfair and high-priced licensing behavior,including the basis of license fee calculation and license rate.Second,our country should define the monopoly power market of behavior correctly,and attach importance to the link between unfair and high price licensing behavior and other abusive behavior or business model,that is,we should grasp the root causes of market power generated by behavior accurately to formulate corrective programs.Third,from the macro point of view,we should also adhere to the "legal supremacy" of the concept of regulation,selecting "intellectual property right priority" or "competitive advantage" to guide the regulatory attitude at the right time.with industrial policy to guide the anti-monopoly law to regulate unfair and high-priced licensing behavior. |
