Enforcing & Licensing 5G SEPs: An Innovator’s Perspective
Standard Setting Organizations (SSOs) exist to identify and select the best innovations entire industries will build upon. Those contributing patented technologies are asked to provide fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory assurances. In essence, patent owners contributing technologies are committing to provide access to their Standard Essential Patents (SEPs).
It has always been difficult to determine what is a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory, or FRAND, licensing rate given confidential licenses and litigation settlements. That task is becoming all the more difficult as commentators call into question the wisdom of patent hold-up theory and evidence mounts with respect to the existence of patent hold-outs choosing to efficiently infringe instead of engaging in good faith licensing negotiations.
What is true is that without substantial investment by those who play the difficult role of innovator, there would be no standards, and 5G technology is no different. Of course, without technology implementers who roll out standards and cutting-edge technological advances to consumers, even the greatest advances would lay dormant and unused. So, how does one strike that proper balance?
This session will explore these issues from the viewpoint of the innovators in the race to deliver revolutionary 5G technology that promises enormous change. Among other matters, the panel will discuss the role of Standard Setting Organizations (SSOs), Ericsson’s recent victory at the Federal Circuit in TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson and the ongoing fight between the FTC and Qualcomm now at the Ninth Circuit.
- Standard Essential Patents: The Myths and Realities of Standard Implementation
- Searching for Answers to the Standard Essential Patent Problem
- Key Considerations for Global SEP Litigation (By Mintz Levin)
- ‘Not Just Another G’: Apple’s Intel Purchase Underscores the Sprint to 5G
About MCLE Credit
MCLE has been approved in Texas (1 hrs) and Missouri (1.2 hrs). Application for MCLE pending in Virginia, Oklahoma and Arkansas.
States including California, Florida, Illinois, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota and Wisconsin accept credits when a course has been approved by another MCLE jurisdiction, as has occurred here.
Other states require attending attorneys to complete a form requesting credit. Some states, such as Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Washington require attorneys to submit an application for approval of courses taken out of state. These states sometimes require the application to be submitted immediately following the completion of the CLE activity, please check the requirements in your state.