For the first time at any time, the head of the Antitrust Division for the Division of Justice is a patent attorney – Makan Delrahim – who is known to be “Makan Antitrust Good All over again”
In a latest speech, Delrahim defined his normal posture – that patent holders rarely generate antitrust problems. Alternatively, it is similarly very likely that the issue lies with companies utilizing new systems with out first obtaining a license from the suitable patent holders. He defined that the DOJ’s historic strategy has been a “one-sided aim on the keep-up issue” in ways that generate a “serious threat to the impressive approach.”
In response to Delrahim’s strategy, a group of technologies implementer companies (also known as downstream innovators) and regulation professors wrote to Delrahim arguing that “patent keep-up is true, properly documented, and harming US field and consumers” — specifically in the area of Specifications Necessary Patents (SEP) — and in ways that the antitrust laws ought to support repair.
Sweeping in now to buffer Delrahim’s posture are a group of libertarian scholars and many others (such as David Kappos and Choose Michel) who have available their competing letter. Their posture is mainly that the drastic solutions associated with antitrust laws ought to only be utilized based mostly on solid evidence of problems getting prompted in the sector. In this article, they argue that no evidence has shown that violations of FRAND commitments in fact result in sector hurt.
Prof. Jorge Contreras has penned on these troubles in a number of Patently-O posts. Contreras did not signal both letter.
Guest Article by Prof. Jorge Contreras: TCL v. Ericsson: The 1st Major U.S. Leading-Down FRAND Royalty Selection
Unwired World v. Huawei: An English Perspective on FRAND Royalties
Guest Article on Making use of the Antitrust Laws to Police Patent Privateering
Great Factors Arrive in Threes? DOJ, FTC and EC Officers Wax Eloquent About FRAND