Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
Non-Discrimination Prong of FRAND: Methodologically in Contrast to WTO Non-Discrimination Principle and with Special Reference to China's Related Judicial Practice |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
The kernel of the non-discrimination principle seems to be easily understandable, but actually a specific interpretation of it could be very knotty in the complicated FRAND context. A methodologically comparative illumination can be conducive to uncovering the inherent complexity of the non-discrimination principle. In addition, the non-discrimination prong of FRAND is unavoidably intertwined with non-disclosure agreements between SEP licensors and licensees. To achieve the goal of non-discrimination normally depends on sufficient disclosure of earlier comparable licensing terms regarding royalty rates, but confidentiality- related issues in this domain are still very intractable in reality. As an increasingly important jurisdiction over SEP-based legal disputes, China also encountered the problem of how to appropriately and satisfactorily interpret legal issues regarding the non-discrimination prong. Some potential challenges concerning non-discrimination issues in SEP-based cases in China may lie ahead. The theoretical and practical controversies over the non-discrimination prong of FRAND still exist globally, and thus more in-depth relevant research needs to be done, especially in the face of an upcoming era of unparalleled interconnectivity arising from 5G, IoT, AI, and so on. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2019 | 10.1109/MCOMSTD.2019.1900013 | IEEE Communications Standards Magazine |
Field | DocType | Volume |
Law and economics,Confidentiality,Interconnectivity,China,Internet of Things,Jurisdiction,Business | Journal | 3 |
Issue | ISSN | Citations |
2 | 2471-2825 | 0 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.34 | 0 | 1 |