海蛎煎蛋怎么做EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brusls, 29.11.2017
COM(2017) 712 final
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE
Setting out the EU approach to Standard Esntial Patents
I NTRODUCTION
The interplay between patents and standards is important for innovation and growth. Standards ensure that interoperable and safe technologies are widely disminated among companies and consumers. Patents provide R&D with incentives and enable innovative companies to receive an adequate return o
n investments. Standards1frequently make reference to technologies that are protected by patents. A patent that protects technology esntial to a standard is called a standard-esntial patent (SEP). SEPs therefore protect technologies that are esntial for complying with technical standards and for marketing products bad on such standards.
Standards support innovation and growth in Europe, in particular providing for interoperability of digital technologies that are the foundation of the Digital Single Market (DSM). For example, computers, smartphones or tablets connect to the internet or other devices via standardid technologies such as long-term evolution (LTE), WiFi, or Bluetooth, all of which are protected by SEPs. Without the widespread u of such standardid technologies, such interconnectivity would not be possible2.
In the hyper-connected era, interconnectivity becomes even more crucial. A wide range of new products need to be interconnected, as to provide consumers with additional products and rvices (e.g. smart hou appliances) and to create new business opportunities for European companies.
The digitalisation of the economy creates great opportunities for EU industry. The estimated economic potential of IoT applications in devices for humans, homes, offices, factories, worksites, ret
ail environments, cities, vehicles and the outdoors will be up to EUR 9 trillion per year by 2025 in developed countries3. The digitalisation of products and rvices can add more than EUR 110 billion in revenue to the European economy per year over the next five years4. The ability of connected devices and systems to work together is crucial for maximising this economic potential. Without interoperability, enabled by standards, 40 % of the potential benefits of IoT systems would not be reaped5.Without formal standardisation and SEPs, there would be, for example, no connected vehicles. Telediagnosis or remote operations with distant hospitals or to exchange patient information would not be possible either. Patent holders contribute technology for developing standards within standard developing organisations (SDOs). Once a standard is established and the holders of the SEPs have given a commitment to licen them on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, the technology included in the standard should be available to any potential ur of the standard. Smooth licensing practices are therefore esntial to guarantee fair, reasonable and non-1Regulation (EU) 1025/2012 on European standardisation defines the meaning of the terms “standard” and “technical specification”. In this document the term “standard” is ud with both meanings for the sake of brevity.
永井流奈2 For instance, company X marketing residential alarm systems connected to the internet both via W
刑事再审申请书
iFi and LTE to provide consumers with enhanced curity in ca of power cut, would need a licence for the standardid technologies.
3McKiny, 2015. See also the objective t by President Juncker for 5G and the IoT in the State of the Union speech, 14.9.2016.
4PricewaterhouCoopers, 2015 and Boston Consulting Group, 2015. See also: ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digitising-european-industry#ufullinks
5 See McKiny (2015).
discriminatory access to the standardid technologies and to reward patent holders so they continue to invest in R&D and standardisation activities. This in turn plays a prominent role in developing a connected society, where new market players outside the traditional ICT ctors (producers of houhold appliances, connected cars, etc.) need access to the standardid technology.
The evidence however suggests that the licensing and enforcement of SEPs is not amless and may lead to conflicts. Technology urs accu SEP holders of charging excessive licensing fees ba
阳字开头的成语d on weak patent portfolios and of using litigation threats. SEP holders claim that technology urs 'free ride' on their innovations and consciously infringe intellectual property rights (IPR) without engaging in good faith licensing negotiations6. Problems may be particularly acute when players coming from new industrial ctors who are unfamiliar with the traditional ICT business need access to standardid technologies. Disputes and delays in negotiations between technological urs and holders may ultimately delay the widespread u of key standardid technologies. This can hamper the development of interconnected products in Europe, eventually affecting the competitiveness of the EU economy.
In its April 2016 Communication on Standardisation Priorities for the Digital Single Market7, the Commission identified three main areas where the SEP licensing environment could be improved: opaque information on SEP exposure; unclear valuation of patented technologies reading on standards and the definition of FRAND; and the risk of uncertainty in enforcement of SEPs. In addition, the role of open source communities in the development of standards also should be assd.
There is therefore a need for a clear, balanced and reasonable policy for Standard Esntial Patents in the EU with the aim of contributing to the development of the Internet of Things and harnessing Eu
rope's lead role in in this context.
Conflicting interests of stakeholders in certain SDOs may make it difficult for the organisations to provide effective guidance on such complex legal and intellectual property (IP) policy issues. Licensing platform initiatives in this area are still at an early stage and have not yet been adopted by implementers, who may well be hesitant given the uncertainty in the current SEP regulatory environment and who have little incentive to enter into a deal in this context.
In addition, the standardisation of 5G and IoT is a global issue. Europe's industry retains a leading position in many ctors in global markets. The Commission notes the important role European standardisation plays in the global context8.
The Commission therefore considers that there is an urgent need to t out key principles that foster a balanced, smooth and predictable framework for SEPs. The key principles reflect two main objectives: incentivising the development and inclusion of top technologies in standards, by prerving fair and adequate return for the contributions, and ensuring smooth and wide dismination of standardid technologies bad on fair access conditions. A balanced and successful policy on SEPs licensing should work to the benefit of start-ups in 6The economic stakes
are very high: for example, the royalty income for 2G, 3G and 4G standards is approximately EUR 18 billion per year (CRA 2016).
爱国主题班会
7The public consultation organid by the Commission in 2014 clearly shows divergent opinions on the challenges and solutions concerning the SEP environment. See ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databas/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=7833.
8 Patents declared to the ETSI reprent 70% of worldwide SEPs (IPlytics, 2017).
Europe and should rve all EU citizens by giving them access to products and rvices bad on the best performing standardid technology.
This Communication draws on the responsibility of all actors in the SEP licensing context, and all stakeholders are encouraged to contribute to making this framework work in practice. It is not intended to reprent a statement of the law and is without prejudice to the interpretation of EU law by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). It does not bind the Commission as regards the application of EU rules on competition, and in particular Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
1.I NCREASING TRANSPARENCY ON SEP S EXPOSURE
Information on the existence, scope and relevance of SEPs is vital for fair licensing negotiations and for allowing potential urs of a standard to identify the scale of their exposure to SEPs and necessary licensing partners. However, currently the only information on SEPs accessible to urs can be found in declaration databas maintained by SDOs which may lack transparency. This situation makes licensing negotiations and the anticipation of risks related to SEPs particularly difficult to navigate for start-ups and SMEs. The primary purpo of declarations is to reassure an SDO and all third parties that the technology will be accessible to urs, typically under a commitment to licen under FRAND conditions.
SDO databas may record tens of thousands of SEPs for a single standard, and this trend is growing9. The declarations are bad on a lf-asssment by the patent holder, and are not subject to scrutiny regarding the esntiality of the declared patent, which can evolve in the cour of the standard adoption procedure. In addition, stakeholders report that even in concrete licensing negotiations licensors fail to substantiate their claims with more preci information. This is particularly unsatisfactory in the context of IoT where new players with little experience of SEPs licensing are continually entering the market for connectivity. The Commission therefore believes that measures, as outlined below, are needed to improve the information on SEPs.
1.1.I MPROVING QUALITY AND ACCESSIBILITY OF INFORMATION RECORDED IN SDO
DATABASES
The Commission believes that SDOs should provide detailed information in their databas to support the SEP licensing framework. While SDO databas collect large amounts of declaration data10, they often do not provide ur-friendly accessibility to interested parties, and lack esntial quality features. The Commission therefore takes the view that the quality and accessibility of the databas should be improved11. First, data should be easily accessible through ur friendly interfaces, both for patent holders, implementers and third parties. All declared information should be archable bad on the relevant standardisation projects, which may also require the transformation of historic data into current formats. Quality process should eliminate also duplications and other obvious flaws. Finally, there should be links to patent office databas, including updates of patent status, ownership and its transfer. 9For instance, more than 23 500 patents have been declared esntial to the Global System for Mobile Communication standard and the 3G or Universal Mobile Telecommunication System standards developed at the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). Such standard apply to all smartphones and devices having a mobile connection. For more figures, e 'Landscaping study on SEPs' IPlytics (20
17) and 'Patents and Standards - A modern framework for IPR-bad standardization' ECSIP (2014).
10 Some SDOs require specific patent disclosures as they recogni their benefits, while others permit blanket declarations. This ction of the Communication refers to SDOs with specific patent disclosure.
11See for example the long running 'DARE' project to improve the ETSI’s databa.
Work on improving databas needs to be combined with a stricter scrutiny on compliance with declaration obligations as defined in current SDO policies to avoid incomplete declarations12.
1.2.D EVELOPING AN INFORMATION TOOL TO ASSIST LICENSING NEGOTIATIONS
The Commission notes that the current declaration system in SDOs supports the technical standard tting process and is not geared towards future SEP licensing. However, it is clear that there are net benefits in extending the current practice and purpo of declarations and databas to the creation of new transparency tools which, without losing their main purpo, can greatly facilitate licensing negotiation. Proportionality considerations are esntial in this context. Whilst excessive burdens for stakeholders should be avoided, it should be born in mind that in concrete licensing neg4用英语怎么说
排骨的家常做法otiations, patent holders necessarily have to invest in substantiating to SEP urs why patents from the patent holders' portfolio are esntial to the standard or how the patents are being infringed13. The Commission therefore believes that propod incremental improvements with controlled costs can substantially reduce overall transaction costs during licensing negotiations as well as infringement risks, to benefit both parties in negotiations14.
1.2.1.More up-to-date and preci declarations
Declarations occur early on in the standardisation process, with normally no review later on. However, technical solutions propod in standards negotiations evolve up until the final standard15 is agreed. While the majority of declarations concern patent applications, the patent claims under the final patent granted after adoption of the standard can differ considerably16, as their content may change during the granting process. Therefore, rightholders should review the relevance of their declarations at the time of adoption of the final standard (and subquent significant revisions) and when a final granting decision on the patent is taken. Declarations should also include enough information to asss patent exposure. Patent holders should at least make reference to the ction of the standard that is relevant to the SEP and to the link with the patent family. Declarations should also clearly identify a contact for the owner/licensor of the declared SEP.
Finally, it should be noted that SEPs on key technologies are more frequently litigated17. Associated information is relevant for all interested licenes and can play a role in limiting the possibility of future litigation. SDOs should therefore provide the possibility and incentives for patent holders and technology urs to report the ca reference and main outcome of final decisions, positive or negative, on declared SEPs (including on esntiality and patent validity). As companies usually only litigate a few valuable patents within a portfolio, and both patent holders and urs should have an interest in reporting decisions in their respective favour, the associated burden of this measure would be limited.
12 For further details, plea e the summary report of the public consultation organid by DG GROW in 2015. ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/14482/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native.
13 See CRA (2016).
14 See ction 3 below in relation to effective enforcement.
15 For instance, a potential patent or patent application initially declared for a candidate technology may not be retained in the relead standard, or the declared patent application may be revid duri
ng the granting process.
16 For instance, 71% of SEPs declared at major SDOs (73% at the ETSI) are only granted after the standard has been relead (IPlytics, 2017).
形容仙女的词语17 See ECSIP (2014).
