Standard-Essential Patents and Antitrust: Of Fighting Ships and Frankenstein Monsters

Sean P. Gates, Oct 15, 2013

Standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) have been at the heart of a debate about the reach of U.S. antitrust law. In recent years, the focus has been on whether breach of a good faith commitment to license on reasonable and non-discriminatory (“RAND”) terms can be the basis for a monopolization claim. The question is whether, in the absence of any fraud or deception at the time of the RAND commitment, an antitrust violation occurs when a holder of a RAND-encumbered patent either refuses to grant a license on RAND terms or seeks injunctive relief.

In consent decrees, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has stated that such conduct may violate Section 5 of the FTC Act as an unfair method of competition. But no court has ruled on such a theory.And the Commission has been careful to distinguish between Section 5, which only the FTC can enforce, and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which the Department of Justice and private litigants may enforce.

Links to Full Content

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!