摘要
专利技术被策定为标准必要专利后,如专利权人仍可肆意行使其排他权利会阻碍标准的实施。专利权人作出FRAND承诺,这意味着专利权人排他权利的行使会受到限制。但是,由于FRAND承诺的效力不及于未参与标准制定过程中的第三人,由此可能导致专利劫持问题。适当的损害赔偿额是解决专利劫持问题的根本路径之一。日本"Apple Japan vs.Samsung"案中损害赔偿额的计算前提是损害赔偿额等于专利许可费,具体计算符合FRAND承诺的专利许可费时,为防止专利许可费堆叠问题,使用了"设定峰值法"。
After a patent is designated as the standard essential patent,if the patent holder still enforces the exclusive right willfully,the standard cannot be implemented successfully.FRAND as committed by the patent holder means that the enforcement of an exclusive right will be restricted.However,the effect of FRAND commitment does not extend to the third party who does not participate the standard setting,whereby the patent holdup may occur.To calculate an appropriate compensation for damages is one of the solution to this problem.The compensation for damages equals to the royalty according to the decision in the case ＂Apple Japan vs.Samsung＂.At the same time,to prevent the problem of royalty stacking,a method of setting a ceiling was adopted.
出处
《知识产权》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第3期99-104,共6页
Intellectual Property
