Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1569498
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (70)



 


 



Taking Contracts Seriously: The Meaning of the Voluntary Commitment to License Essential Patents on 'Fair and Reasonable' Terms


Roger G. Brooks


Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

Damien Geradin


George Mason University School of Law; Tilburg University - Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC); Covington & Burling LLP

March 12, 2010


Abstract:     
The literature addressing the meaning of a commitment made by holders of patents ‘essential’ to a standard to licence such patents on ‘fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory’ (FRAND) terms and conditions is now substantial. While reaching quite different conclusions, a number of authors have addressed this as a question of economic theory: what limitations (if any) on the freedom of the parties negotiating a licence to essential patents will best ensure efficient outcomes?

On the basis of such analyses, authors have variously argued that, in order to satisfy a ‘fair and reasonable’ commitment, a patent holder:
• Must charge no more than the incremental value of his invention over the next best technical alternative;
• Must not negotiate for a royalty-free cross-licence as part of the consideration for a licence;
• Must set his royalty rate based on a mathematical proportion of all patents essential to the practice of a standard;
• Must set his royalty rate in such a way as to prevent cumulative royalties on the standardised product from exceeding a low percentage of the total sale price of that product;
• Must not raise requested royalty rates after the standard has been adopted, or after the relevant market has grown to maturity;
• Is not entitled to seek injunctive relief against a standard implementer should they fail to agree on licence terms.

The types of economic arguments relied on by these authors to justify these restrictive regimes may well be useful in debating public policy and the proper application of national competition law – although one of the present authors and others have elsewhere critiqued the merits of many of these calls for what is essentially government intervention in the private licencing process. But in this paper we step back to ask a different question: What do these arguments and proposed regimes have to do with the contract which is the source of the FRAND obligation?

Number of Pages in PDF File: 20

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 15, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Brooks, Roger G. and Geradin, Damien, Taking Contracts Seriously: The Meaning of the Voluntary Commitment to License Essential Patents on 'Fair and Reasonable' Terms (March 12, 2010). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1569498 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1569498

Contact Information

Roger G. Brooks
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP ( email )
825 8th Avenue
New York, NY 10019
United States
212-474-1072 (Phone)
Damien Geradin (Contact Author)
George Mason University School of Law
3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States

George Mason Law School Logo

Tilburg University - Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC) ( email )
Warandelaan 2
Tilburg, 5000 LE
Netherlands
HOME PAGE: http://www.tilburguniversity.nl/tilec/
Covington & Burling LLP ( email )
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004-2401
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,880
Downloads: 456
Download Rank: 33,914
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  70

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.578 seconds