Advanced

From Innovation to Domination: Exercising IPR as abuse of art. 102 TFEU

Wymyslowski, Patryk LU (2014) JAEM01 20141
Department of Law
Abstract
This thesis deals with the enforcement of intellectual property rights as an abuse of dominance. In particular after refusal to license a patent, which is essential for a standardized technology. Seeking for injunction relief may in some circumstances violate applicable competition law. The analysis will provide a hint, whereas patent holder who is dominating in particular market can or should be immune from EC scrutiny. This paper focuses on recently closed Samsung case on 3G standard, where a dominating company refused to share a technology, which was granted as standard technology in mobile telecommunication sector. Exercising IPR against competitors who are relying on standardized technology without having a licence becomes abusive.... (More)
This thesis deals with the enforcement of intellectual property rights as an abuse of dominance. In particular after refusal to license a patent, which is essential for a standardized technology. Seeking for injunction relief may in some circumstances violate applicable competition law. The analysis will provide a hint, whereas patent holder who is dominating in particular market can or should be immune from EC scrutiny. This paper focuses on recently closed Samsung case on 3G standard, where a dominating company refused to share a technology, which was granted as standard technology in mobile telecommunication sector. Exercising IPR against competitors who are relying on standardized technology without having a licence becomes abusive. The analysis shows however, that it should be assessed more carefully, than it actually was, taking into consideration certain conditions established before in similar cases by CJEU. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
@misc{4628704,
  abstract     = {This thesis deals with the enforcement of intellectual property rights as an abuse of dominance. In particular after refusal to license a patent, which is essential for a standardized technology. Seeking for injunction relief may in some circumstances violate applicable competition law. The analysis will provide a hint, whereas patent holder who is dominating in particular market can or should be immune from EC scrutiny. This paper focuses on recently closed Samsung case on 3G standard, where a dominating company refused to share a technology, which was granted as standard technology in mobile telecommunication sector. Exercising IPR against competitors who are relying on standardized technology without having a licence becomes abusive. The analysis shows however, that it should be assessed more carefully, than it actually was, taking into consideration certain conditions established before in similar cases by CJEU.},
  author       = {Wymyslowski, Patryk},
  keyword      = {Intellectual Property Rights Abuse of dominance Samsung v. Apple Standardization in competition law Exercising IPR as abuse Exceptional circumstances doctrine IMS Health Magill Microsoft Samsung's commitments Injunction relief for standardized technology},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {From Innovation to Domination: Exercising IPR as abuse of art. 102 TFEU},
  year         = {2014},
}