IPO Consults SMEs on SEP Licensing

Standard YouTube Licence


On the day that my article Patents - Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others appeared in which I discussed Mr Justice Mellor's 225-page judgment in Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others [2023] EWHC 539 (Pat), the Intellectual Property Office ("IPO") announced a questionnaire on standard essential patents ("SEPs") for SME small-cap and mid-cap businesses.

This follows an earlier consultation on SEP licensing that the IPO launched on 7 Dec 2021.  I discussed it in IPO Consultation on SEPs and Innovation on 19 Dec 2021.  The IPO received 56 responses to that consultation.  The names of the respondents appear in Annex A to a Summary of Responses to the Call for Views.  Their responses are analysed in that document. 

Bearing in mind the costs of FRAND litigation and that it seems to involve only massive multinational companies in the electronics and telecommunications industries, I was surprised that the IPO thought it worthwhile to consult SMEs at all.  I am also curious as to what the IPO means by "small-cap" and "mid-cap" because there does not appear to be a definition in the questionnaire or anywhere else.   

The IPO states in its guidance Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) explained that it had heard that new entrants and SMEs often lack the experience and knowledge to enter negotiations on a level playing field. It also heard that those companies do not take part in the standard-setting process which may mean they do not know whether a patent is essential to a standard and therefore whether a licence is required. Some respondents to the previous consultation stated that some of these issues might cause barriers to innovation and scale-up of new entrants.

I am not sure how realistic those concerns are.   To my mind, the real barrier to SME involvement is the massive investment required for R&D in telecommunications, the need for multiple technical trials and lengthy FRAND trials and the obligation to take a worldwide licence or face an injunction in the UK. Only companies like Huawei and Lenovo can afford such costs.  There is no British equivalent to those companies or even to continental ones like Ericsson, Nokia or Phillips.

Having said that the IPO has asked for responses. As questionnaires go this is a fairly short one.  It consists of 4 or 5 screens with about 4 or so questions per screen.  Most are very short and non-technical.  As I am a small business and reasonably well informed on the relevant issues I answered the questionnaire.   It took no more than a few minutes to complete.  The consultation will remain open until 24 April 2023.

Anybody wishing to discuss this article may call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact page,

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

UPC Court Dress

Image
  Jane Lambert The robes to be worn by the judges of the Court of First Instance and Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court are quite fetching.  Photos of those robes are to be found in the Annexes to the Presidium Decision of the Dress Code of the Unified Patent Court  of 4 April 2023 which came into force yesterday, Art 1 of the Decision requires judges of the Court of First Instance to wear a gown as shown and described in Annex I,  It is a black and blue garment that extends halfway to the lower leg. The outer fabric of the gown is made from black, 100% ultra-fine Merino virgin wool. The trim on the sleeves and lapels is dark blue and made from 100% fine cotton velvet. There is contrasting piping between the trim and outer fabric in dark blue.  The sleeves and back are pleated.  The chest and back are lined with paisley royal blue. A note that is not absolutely clear refers to "buttons below a concealed button placket,"  Gentlemen are expected to wear a white shirt a
Read more

Latest Developments in Intellectual Property Law

Image
Gray's Inn Square Author Chensiyuan   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert On 18 Sept 2023, I shall be one of the speakers at IP Update, a seminar on some of the latest developments in intellectual property law which will take place between 14:00 and 17:00 in my chambers at 4-5 Gray's Inn  Square . The other speakers will be James Bridgeman SC , who will also chair the seminar, Mark Engelman , Christian Panayi  and Elizabeth Nicholls .  For intellectual property specialists in the Midlands, we shall repeat the seminar on 25 Sept between 14:00 and 17:00 in our Birmingham premises at 2 Snow Hill.   Should those talks go well, we shall repeat them in Manchester and the other cities with  Business and Property Courts . Attendees will be invited to arrive between 13:30 and 14:00 for registration and networking over tea or coffee.  They can reserve their places by calling our senior clerk, Emily Martin, on 020 7404 5252 or registering on Eventbrite.  Tickets
Read more

Patent Law Update

Image
Howard Building Author TheWub   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Except for 2020 when the Informa IP Law Simmer Schoo l took place online and 2021 when it was held in December,  I have chaired the session on patent law and delivered a talk on FRAND  at the Howard Building in Downing College Cambridge for the last 5 years.  I shall do so again this year between the 7 and 11 Aug 2023.  There is an excellent programme  of talks from distinguished speakers .  Attendees are housed in college and fun s ocial events are arranged every night .  Anyone wishing to attend the course can book here . A lot has happened in my topic since last year.   There has been Mr Justice Mellor's judgment in  I Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2023] EWHC 539 (Pat) on 16 March 2023.  That was the second time that an English court had been called upon to determine what terms were fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND")
Read more