可比协议法作为计算标准必要专利许可费率的一种重要方法,在司法实践中得到广泛应用,但我国法院在应用可比协议法进行计算的规则还未健全。文章将从可比协议法的概念出发,以高清公司诉OPPO公司案为例,对专利许可谈判的过错实质认定、许...可比协议法作为计算标准必要专利许可费率的一种重要方法,在司法实践中得到广泛应用,但我国法院在应用可比协议法进行计算的规则还未健全。文章将从可比协议法的概念出发,以高清公司诉OPPO公司案为例,对专利许可谈判的过错实质认定、许可谈判的时间认定、可比协议条款中无歧视性的认定等方面对可比协议法在适用过程中存在的问题进行分析,并对问题的解决提出完善建议,以期为标准必要专利许可费的确定尽绵薄之力。The Comparable Agreement Method, as an important method for calculating the royalty rate of standard essential patents, has been widely applied in judicial practice, but the rules for applying the Comparable Agreement Method in China’s courts have not yet been established. This paper will start from the concept of the Comparable Agreement Method, taking the case of High Definition Company vs. OPPO Company as an example, to analyze the problems that exist in the application of the Comparable Agreement Method in terms of the actual determination of fault in patent licensing negotiations, the identification of the time of patent licensing negotiations, and the recognition of nondiscriminatory terms in comparable agreements. It will also offer suggestions for improvement to address these problems, with the hope of contributing to the determination of standard essential patent royalties.展开更多
文摘可比协议法作为计算标准必要专利许可费率的一种重要方法,在司法实践中得到广泛应用,但我国法院在应用可比协议法进行计算的规则还未健全。文章将从可比协议法的概念出发,以高清公司诉OPPO公司案为例,对专利许可谈判的过错实质认定、许可谈判的时间认定、可比协议条款中无歧视性的认定等方面对可比协议法在适用过程中存在的问题进行分析,并对问题的解决提出完善建议,以期为标准必要专利许可费的确定尽绵薄之力。The Comparable Agreement Method, as an important method for calculating the royalty rate of standard essential patents, has been widely applied in judicial practice, but the rules for applying the Comparable Agreement Method in China’s courts have not yet been established. This paper will start from the concept of the Comparable Agreement Method, taking the case of High Definition Company vs. OPPO Company as an example, to analyze the problems that exist in the application of the Comparable Agreement Method in terms of the actual determination of fault in patent licensing negotiations, the identification of the time of patent licensing negotiations, and the recognition of nondiscriminatory terms in comparable agreements. It will also offer suggestions for improvement to address these problems, with the hope of contributing to the determination of standard essential patent royalties.
