Loading...
Publication
O abuso de posição dominante no licenciamento de patentes essenciais a normas
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 769.39 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
As preocupações de natureza anticoncorrencial no âmbito do licenciamento de Patentes Essenciais a Normas (PEN) decorrem da característica de essencialidade inerente ao uso de tais patentes para a implementação de uma determinada norma técnica. A decisão jurisprudencial no caso Huawei v. ZTE representa uma mudança paradigmática, ao clarificar o papel do Direito da Concorrência, em particular o disposto no artigo 102.º do Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia (TFUE), no contexto do licenciamento de PEN. Desde então, a Comissão Europeia tem empreendido esforços no sentido de regulamentar o processo de negociação do licenciamento destas patentes, considerando o complexo equilíbrio entre proporcionar uma remuneração justa aos titulares de patentes e evitar barreiras à entrada de novos concorrentes no mercado. Esta dissertação expõe os principais desafios, o caminho percorrido desde o caso Huawei v. ZTE e a proposta legislativa já avançada. Num volte-face inesperado, a Comissão Europeia comunicou recentemente a retirada da Proposta de Regulamento relativa a Patentes Essenciais a Normas. Tal decisão é um passo atrás, que reinstala uma incerteza jurídica indesejável e abre portas a condutas anticoncorrenciais.
The anticompetitive concerns regarding the licensing of Standard Essential Patents (SEP) stem from the essentiality inherent to the use of such patents in the implementation of a given technical standard. The case law decision in Huawei v. ZTE represents a paradigm shift, by clarifying the role of competition law, in particular the provisions of article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the context of SEP licensing. Since then, the European Commission has endeavoured to regulate the process of negotiating and licensing these patents, considering the complex balance between providing fair remuneration to patent holders and avoiding barriers to the entry of new competitors in the market. This dissertation sets out the main challenges, the path travelled since the Huawei v. ZTE case and the legislative proposal that has already been put forward. In an unexpected turn of events, the European Commission recently announced the withdrawal of the Proposal for a Regulation on Standard Essential Patents. I argue that this decision is a step backwards, reinstating undesirable legal uncertainty and opening doors to anticompetitive practices.
The anticompetitive concerns regarding the licensing of Standard Essential Patents (SEP) stem from the essentiality inherent to the use of such patents in the implementation of a given technical standard. The case law decision in Huawei v. ZTE represents a paradigm shift, by clarifying the role of competition law, in particular the provisions of article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the context of SEP licensing. Since then, the European Commission has endeavoured to regulate the process of negotiating and licensing these patents, considering the complex balance between providing fair remuneration to patent holders and avoiding barriers to the entry of new competitors in the market. This dissertation sets out the main challenges, the path travelled since the Huawei v. ZTE case and the legislative proposal that has already been put forward. In an unexpected turn of events, the European Commission recently announced the withdrawal of the Proposal for a Regulation on Standard Essential Patents. I argue that this decision is a step backwards, reinstating undesirable legal uncertainty and opening doors to anticompetitive practices.
Description
Keywords
Direito da concorrência Propriedade intelectual Patentes essenciais Licenciamento Critérios FRAND Abuso de posição dominante 102º TFUE Competition law Intellectual property law Standard essential patents Licensing FRAND terms Abuse of dominant position Article 102 TFEU
Pedagogical Context
Citation
Publisher
CC License
Without CC licence