Regulation Of Standard Essential Patent Injunctive Relief

Nowadays,in the era of globalization of digital economy,the international market has become an important stage for enterprises to compete.In order to reduce the uncertainty and cost between transactions and promote the interoperability and prosperity of products or services,the standardization process has ushered in accelerated development.In order to ensure the applicability and value of the standard,it is essential to include the advanced technologies in the industry into the standard.At this time,it will inevitably involve the technical solutions that have or will get patent protection,and thus produce the standard essential patents.Standard essential patent has the mandatory and public attributes brought by standard,which gives the right holder stronger market power.Meanwhile,based on the exclusivity of patent right,the right holder can obtain the right remedy through prohibition.Due to the profit-seeking of market subjects,the standards-essential patentee may abuse injunctive relief and use injunctive coercion as a means to obtain excess license conditions.In order to cope with the abuse of injunctive relief and ensure the smooth promotion and application of standards,standards organizations require the subjects involved in the formulation of standards to make FRAND commitments.Ensure fair,reasonable and nondiscriminatory licensing of standard implementers.But at present,different countries have different recognition of the nature of FRAND clause and have adopted different regulatory means to the abuse of prohibition.This paper starts from the relevant judicial precedents inside and outside the domain.Among them,the United States and the European Union,which tend to have multiple cases and have formed a certain system,are the research objects,explore the legal basis and judgment factors of injunctive relief regulation,and summarize a useful part worth referring to by combining the legal regulation system of our country.For domestic,through the analysis of legal regulation and judicial viewpoint change,it can be shown to transform the regulation thinking of the standard essential patent injunctions relief.However,there are still problems such as unclear regulation path,and no clear regulation system has been formed.To the legal nature of FRAND clause question,by comparison relevant point of view,combining FRAND clause’s production background and legal norm system in our country,this article believes that FRAND clause is the intellectual property policy produced in the standardization process,can be taken as the principle of the standard system,and should not be regarded as a civil legal behavior,cannot have the legal effect directly.It can be used as the basis to judge the legitimacy of the behavior and the standard subject.As for the regulation path selection of injunctive relief,standard essential patent has stronger public property than general patent,and the abuse of patent right by the right holder will cause great damage to the public interest.From the perspective of right protection,it is essential to regulate standard essential patent injunctive relief under the framework of patent law.Compared with anti-monopoly defense rules,the regulatory path of patent law has the advantages of more extended protection scope,more direct legal effect and more systematic norms.Moreover,the regulatory path of patent law does not exclude the application of antimonopoly law in the field of standard essential patent injunctive relief.and anti-monopoly law still plays a normative role and legal evaluation significance in specific situations.At present,the provisions of standard essential patent injunctions in patent law are scattered,the normative effectiveness is low,and the judgment criteria are not comprehensive.In order to form an effective normative system,it needs to be improved.In terms of content,it is essential to clarify the principle of application of standard essential patent injunctions.further expand the scope of application,and add public interest considerations into the judgment criteria.In form,it is essential to enhance the level of legal effect to ensure uniform application throughout the country.At the same time.a diversified rate dispute resolution mechanism is introduced to solve the rate disputes from the source,reduce the alienation of the application of the injunction,and make the injunction relief return to the legitimate purpose of protecting the rights of the patentee from being infringed upon.