Panel Members 小组成员 Alan Zhiyong Fan, Senior Deputy Director, Intellectual Property Department, Huawei Technologies 樊志勇, 知识产权部副部长, 华为技术有限公司 3 Panel Mem

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Panel Members 小组成员 Alan Zhiyong Fan, Senior Deputy Director, Intellectual Property Department, Huawei Technologies 樊志勇, 知识产权部副部长, 华为技术有限公司 3 Panel Mem"

馥温
5 years ago
Views:

1 Standard Essential Patent Litigation: A Case Study involving Huawei and InterDigital 标准必要专利诉讼 : 华为与 InterDigital 的专利纠纷案例研究 CHINA INTERNATIONAL IP FORUM 中国国际知识产权论坛 June 12, 年 6 月 12 日 Panel Members 小组成员 Stanley Young, partner, Covington & Burling Stanley Young, 合伙人, 科文顿柏灵律师事务所 2 1

2 Panel Members 小组成员 Alan Zhiyong Fan, Senior Deputy Director, Intellectual Property Department, Huawei Technologies 樊志勇, 知识产权部副部长, 华为技术有限公司 3 Panel Members 小组成员 Professor Zhang Ping of Peking University 张平教授, 北京大学 4 2

3 Panel Members 小组成员 Hongbin Wang, Legal Director, Intel 王洪彬, 中国区法律总监, 英特尔中国 5 Fundamental Principles for Standard Essential Patents 标准必要专利的基本原则 As part of the standard setting process, participating industry members commit to do these things: 作为标准制定程序的一部分, 参与的行业成员承诺做到以下几点 : Disclose patents that are essential to the standards that are adopted by standard setting organizations 披露对标准制定组织所采用的标准而言必要的专利 License those standard essential patents ( SEPs ) on terms that are fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ( FRAND ) 按照公平合理无歧视原则 (FRAND) 许可标准必要专利 ( 标准必要专利 ) 6 3

4 Recent Examples of FRAND Rate Findings in U.S. Courts 美国法院近期有关 FRAND 许可费率判决的案例 Microsoft v. Motorola (April 2013) 微软和摩托罗拉纠纷案 (2013 年 4 月 ) In re Innovatio IP Ventures (October 2013) Innovatio IP Ventures 案 (2013 年 10 月 ) Ericsson v. D-Link Systems (June 2013) 爱立信和友讯科技纠纷案 (2013 年 6 月 ) Realtek v. LSI and Agere (February 2014) 瑞昱半导体和 LSI 公司及 Agere 公司纠纷案 (2014 年 2 月 ) 7 Microsoft v. Motorola 微软和摩托罗拉纠纷案 For H.264 and IEEE SEPs, the court considered several factors: 针对 H.264 和 IEEE 标准必要专利, 法院考虑了以下因素 : Patent pool rates, another license and an internal evaluation 专利联盟许可费率其他许可及内部评估 The value of the patents to the standard 专利相对于标准的价值 The value of the patents to the accused products 专利相对于被控产品的价值 The licensor s share of the total number of SEPs 所有标准必要专利中许可人占有的份额 8 4

5 In re Innovatio IP Ventures Innovatio IP Ventures 案 For IEEE patents, the court did this: 针对 IEEE 专利, 法院判定如下 : Determined the profit on the smallest salable unit practicing the patents (the WiFi chip) 确定了使用专利的最小可销售单位 (wifi 芯片 ) 的利润 Considered the importance of the patents to the standard and to the products 考虑了专利相对于标准和产品的重要性 Calculated a royalty using the patentee s share of the total number of SEPs 利用专利权人在所有标准必要专利中的份额计算了许可费 Rejected various licenses as not comparable 否决了多项许可的可比性 9 U.S. Federal Trade Commission Settlement with Google/Motorola 美国联邦贸易委员会与谷歌 / 摩托罗拉达成和解 Google/Motorola had sought SEP injunctions in the U.S. International Trade Commission ( ITC ) and in German courts 谷歌 / 摩托罗拉向美国国际贸易委员会 ( 国际贸易委员会 ) 和德国法院申请标准必要专利禁令 The settlement in January 2013 prohibited Google from seeking an injunction before offering a license and binding arbitration to determine any disputed license terms 根据 2013 年 1 月达成的和解协议, 谷歌不得在提供许可前及在仲裁机构就争议许可条款作出有约束力的仲裁前申请禁令 The licensee may prevent an injunction by agreeing to accept a judicial determination of a FRAND rate 若被许可人接受对 FRAND 许可费率的司法判定, 其可避免禁令 10 5

6 Injunctions and the U.S. International Trade Commission 禁令与美国国际贸易委员会 So far, the ITC has not declined to issue an exclusion order based on a FRAND obligation 迄今为止, 国际贸易委员会从未基于 FRAND 义务拒绝签发排除令 But the United States Trade Representative, acting for the President, vetoed an exclusion order for a standard-essential patent in the dispute between Samsung and Apple in August 2013 但代表总统行事的美国贸易代表在 2013 年 8 月三星和苹果纠纷案中否决了针对一项标准必要专利的排除令 Any future FRAND cases will require detailed public interest findings 今后的 FRAND 案件均需进行详细的公共利益研究 11 U.S. Federal Circuit s April 25, 2014 Views on SEP Injunctions in Apple v. Motorola 美国联邦巡回法院于 2014 年 4 月 25 日出具的针对苹果和摩托罗拉纠纷案中标准必要专利禁令的观点 Motorola had sought an injunction and damages based on Apple s alleged infringement of SEPs 摩托罗拉基于苹果涉嫌侵犯标准必要专利申请了禁令和损害赔偿 The District Court (Judge Posner) had hinted that Motorola s RAND commitment had mostly foreclosed the availability of injunctive relief and granted summary judgment against an injunction 地区法院 (Posner 法官 ) 示意摩托罗拉的合理无歧视原则 (RAND) 承诺基本上排除了禁令救济的可能性, 并作出了针对一项禁令的即决判决 But the Federal Circuit unanimously rejected any per se rule against injunctions for standard essential patents 但是联邦巡回法院一致认为标准必要专利禁令并非本身违法 12 6

7 Judge Reyna s Opinion for the U.S. Federal Circuit in Apple v. Motorola Reyna 法官为美国联邦巡回法院就苹果和摩托罗拉纠纷案提出的意见 A FRAND commitment may prevent the showing of irreparable harm needed for an injunction FRAND 承诺可能会使得申请禁令所需的不可挽回的损失难以成立 But an injunction may be justified if the infringer unilaterally refuses a FRAND license or unreasonably delays negotiations 但如侵权人单方拒绝 FRAND 许可或者无理地推迟谈判, 则这可能构成申请禁令的理由 Motorola was not entitled to an injunction, because Motorola s many licenses showed that there was no irreparable harm, and negotiations had been ongoing so Apple had not unilaterally refused to deal 摩托罗拉无权获得禁令, 因为摩托罗拉的多项许可显示其不存在不可挽回的损失, 且持续进行的协商表明苹果没有单方拒绝交易 13 Judge Prost s Concurring Opinion in Apple v. Motorola Prost 法官就苹果和摩托罗拉纠纷案的协同意见书 Judge Prost concurred in the result but said that an infringer s refusal to negotiate a license should not justify an injunction on an SEP Prost 法官同意前述结论, 但表示侵权人拒绝许可协商不应构成授予标准必要专利禁令的理由 An infringer should be allowed to challenge an SEP s validity 侵权人有权质疑标准必要专利的有效性 Damages can be increased to compensate for a refusal to license 可以增加损害赔偿以补偿拒绝许可带来的损害 Damages are always sufficient to compensate for infringement 损害赔偿往往足以补偿侵权损害 14 7

8 Judge Rader s Dissenting Opinion in Apple v. Motorola Rader 法官就苹果和摩托罗拉纠纷案的反对意见 Judge Rader dissented against the summary denial of injunctive relief and stated that Motorola deserved a trial Rader 法官就禁令救济的即决驳回提出了异议, 并表示摩托罗拉应获得审理 The evidence sufficed to create a triable issue about whether Apple was an unwilling licensee and whether irreparable harm existed 既有证据足以提出一个可审理的问题, 即苹果是否不愿取得授权以及是否存在不可挽回的损失 Concern with hold-out, years of refusal to negotiate 对阻止多年拒绝协商存有疑问 A district court needs to distinguish the value of the invention from the value due to standardization to determine whether Motorola s offer was FRAND 地区法院需要将发明的价值和标准化所带来的价值区分开, 以确定摩托罗拉的要约是否符合公平合理无歧视原则 (FRAND) 15 InterDigital Litigation in the U.S. InterDigital 在美国的诉讼 InterDigital sued in the U.S. International Trade Commission ( ITC ) and in Delaware District Court in July 2011 (on 3G patents) and again in January 2013 (on 3G and 4G patents) InterDigital 于 2011 年 7 月向美国国际贸易委员会 ( 国际贸易委员会 ) 以及特拉华州地区法院提出 ( 有关 3G 专利 ) 的诉讼, 并于 2013 年 1 月再次提出 ( 有关 3G 和 4G 专利 ) 的诉讼 InterDigital asked that the ITC issue an exclusion order InterDigital 请求国际贸易委员会签发排除令 Huawei attempted to obtain FRAND rate adjudications in Delaware courts 华为试图在特拉华州法院获得 FRAND 许可费率判决 16 8

9 InterDigital Litigation in the U.S. InterDigital 在美国的诉讼 First ITC trial in February 2013, followed by a decision against InterDigital on infringement and validity issues by an Administrative Law Judge on June 28, 年 2 月国际贸易委员会进行了初次审理, 随后在 2013 年 6 月 28 日, 行政法官就侵权和有效性问题驳回了 InterDigital 的主张 The Commission affirmed the decision against InterDigital on December 20, 2013 委员会于 2013 年 12 月 20 日维持了对 InterDigital 的裁决 On December 23, 2013, Huawei and InterDigital agreed to terminate their litigation in the U.S. after entering into an arbitration agreement 2013 年 12 月 23 日, 华为和 InterDigital 达成仲裁协议并随后同意终止其在美国的诉讼 17 9

Public Projects A Thesis Submitted to Department of Construction Engineering National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology In Partial

Public Projects A Thesis Submitted to Department of Construction Engineering National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master