标准必要专利权人选择许可环节的自由  

The Freedom of Standard-Essential Patent Holders to Select the Level of Licensing

作　　者：崔国斌[1] Cui Guobin

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《知识产权》2024年第7期58-84,共27页Intellectual Property

摘　　要：拥有标准必要专利的权利人,通常会依据标准组织的专利政策,承诺按照公平、合理和非歧视(FRAND)条件向标准实施者发放专利许可。标准实施者可能是符合该标准的产品零件或组件的供应者,也可能是更大的系统和终端产品的制造商。在收到请求后,专利权人是否有义务向任意环节的标准实施者发放专利许可,是物联网时代的重要问题。在个案中,法院要综合考虑标准组织专利政策的字面含义、标准实施者的现实需求、专利权人的管理成本、相关行业的交易习惯等因素,对专利权人在特定标准组织的专利政策下的许可义务的范围作出合理的解释。原则上,如果标准组织并未明确限定许可层级,专利权人无须承担全面许可义务,可以合理选择许可对象,此所谓专利权人“不告就无须许可”的原则。如果专利权人主动针对上游厂商维权,则会触发许可义务,即有义务向其发出许可。在专利权人独立对外许可不受影响时,作为替代选项的专利池,可以在其与专利权人之间的授权合同约定的范围内,自由选择专利许可的层级。专利权人坚持终端许可的策略,通常不会实质影响上游组件或终端产品的市场竞争,反垄断法并无直接干预的必要。上述解释思路能够避免技术标准被专利挟持,同时确保专利权人获得合理回报,符合社会的整体利益。Holders of standard-essential patents(SEPs)generally commit to offer licenses on fair,reasonable and non-discriminatory(FRAND)terms,based on the patent policy of the individual standard-setting organization(SSO).Patent implementers could be suppliers of parts or components for products that comply with the standard,or they could be manufacturers of larger systems or end products.Whether SEP holder has the obligation to license patent implementers at any level upon request is an important question in the age of the Internet of Things.In individual cases,courts need to interpret the patent policy of SSO,and may also consider the actual needs of the patent implementer,SEP holder's management costs,and trading practice in the relevant industry,and then render a reasonable interpretation of the extent of SEP holder's obligation to license under the specific SSO's patent policy.In principle,if SSO does not include an express statement regarding the level of licensing,SEP holders may choose how and where to offer licenses.If SEP holders take the initiative to assert their rights against upstream manufacturers,they are obliged to offer licenses to such manufacturers.Patent pools,as licensing options,are free to choose the level of patent licensing within the particular scope of contractual authority granted,so long as the participating patent holders'independent licensing of third parties is not affected.SEP holder's decision to offer end-use licenses will not materially affect the competition in the market of upstream components or end-products,so there is no need for direct intervention pursuant to anti-trust law.The above interpretations can provide licensing of patents covering technical standards,and ensure that the SEP holders receive reasonable returns,aligning with the overall interests of society.

关 键 词：标准必要专利 许可层级 FRAND声明 专利池 反垄断 

分 类 号：D923.42[政治法律—民商法学] D997.1[政治法律—法学]