Global Competition for FRAND royalty setting
Europe, the UK, and China in SEP Governance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18256/2238-0604.2026.v22i.5348Palavras-chave:
Standard essential patents, FRAND, global royalties, anti-suit injunctions, jurisdictional competitionResumo
Standard essential patents (SEPs) and licensing on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms have ceased to be a private matter between holders and implementers to become a legal, economic and geopolitical phenomenon of the first order. This paper proposes four factors that explain the significance and orientation of SEP disputes, the national-industry factor, the geopolitical factor, the architectural factor and the factor of the internal balance between holders and implementers, and uses them as a framework for reading jurisdictional competition in FRAND matters. After characterising the types of implementers and holders and the different meanings of the FRAND commitment, the article analyses two salient manifestations of an emerging global governance: the judicial setting of global royalties and anti-suit injunctions. A comparative examination of the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and China, together with the WTO DS611 dispute, reveals a structural tension between the territoriality of the patent and the international vocation of the standard, as well as the risk of court-imposed compulsory licences.
Downloads
Referências
I. books, articles and chapters
Baron, J. A. (2023). The Commission’s Draft SEP Regulation – Focus on Proposed Mechanisms for the Determination of “Reasonable Aggregate Royalties”. 4iP Council.
Berman, P. S. (2012). Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law Beyond Borders. Cambridge University Press.
Bhandari, V. (2023). Geopolitics of the Semiconductor Industry. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Bonadio, E., & Kansara, M. (2024). Unwired Planet v Huawei: global rate setting begins in the UK. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 79-96). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Cohen, M. (2026). China’s ASI Strategic Retreat and WTO Compliance. China IPR Blog.
Colangelo, G. (2024). The politicization of IP protection: the case of standard essential patents. International Center for Law & Economics.
Contreras, J. L. (2019). The New Extraterritoriality: FRAND Royalties, Anti-Suit Injunctions and the Global Race to the Bottom in Disputes over Standards-Essential Patents. Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law, 25(2), 251-286.
Contreras, J. L. (2024). Ericsson v. Samsung: dueling anti-suit injunctions. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 348-356). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Contreras, J. L. (2024). Panasonic v. Xiaomi: the UK interim license. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 398-408). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Contreras, J. L. (2024). Unwired Planet v. Huawei: establishing UK jurisprudence of FRAND. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 61-78). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Contreras, J. L. (2019). Global Rate Setting: A Solution for Standards-Essential Patents? Washington Law Review, 94, 701–758.
Contreras, J. L., & Eixenberger, M. A. (2017). The Anti-Suit Injunction – A Transnational Remedy for Multi-jurisdictional SEP Litigation. In: Contreras, J. L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: Competition, Antitrust, and Patents (pp. 451-459). Cambridge University Press.
Contreras, J. L., & Newman, D. L. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution and FRAND Disputes. In: Contreras, J. L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: Competition, Antitrust, and Patents (pp. 351–362). Cambridge University Press.
Drexl, J., Harhoff, D., Conde Gallego, B., & Slowinski, P. R. (2024). Position Statement of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition of 6 February 2024 on the Commission’s Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Standard Essential Patents. GRUR International, 73(7), 647-665.
Gibson, C. S. (2007). Globalization and the Technology Standards Game: Balancing Concerns of Protectionism and Intellectual Property in International Standards. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 22(4), 1403–1484.
Greenbaum, E. (2018). 5G, Standard-Setting, and National Security. Harvard National Security Journal (Online Edition), 3 July 2018. Available at: https://journals.law.harvard.edu/nsj/2018/07/5g-standard-setting-and-national-security/
Habich, E. (2022). FRAND Access to Data: Perspectives from the FRAND Licensing of Standard-Essential Patents for the Data Act Proposal and the Digital Markets Act. IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 53, 1343–1373.
Hao, Y. (2024). Advanced Codec Technology, LLC v. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Co., Ltd.: first substantive determination of FRAND license fee by the Chinese Supreme People’s Court. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 117-133). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Henkel, J. (2022). Licensing standard-essential patents in the IoT: A value chain perspective on the markets for technology. Research Policy, 51, 104600.
Jacob, R., & Vangimalla, D. (2024). InterDigital v Lenovo: FRAND rates between mutually unwilling parties. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 148-164). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Kieff, F. S., & Grant, T. D. (2021). Patents and Competition: Commercializing Innovation in the Global Ecosystem for 5G and IoT. In: Haber, S., & Lamoreaux, N. R. (eds.), The Battle over Patents: History and Politics of Innovation (pp. 242-261). Hoover Institution.
Lee, J.-A. (2024). Huawei v. Conversant: anti-suit injunctions in China – a response in-kind to the west. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 339-347). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Léonard, A. (2024). Lenovo v. IPCom: jurisdictional conflict and the approach to anti-suit injunctions in the European Union. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 377-390). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Liu, Y. (2024). Royalty rate determination in standard essential patent litigation in China – from regional rate to global rate. Computer Law & Security Review, 55, 106036.
Love, B. J. (2024). TCL v. Ericsson: top-down royalty calculations and jury verdicts in US FRAND cases. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 97-116). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Love, B. J., & Helmers, C. (2023). Patent hold-out and licensing frictions: Evidence from litigation of standard essential patents. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 89, 102978.
Ma, L. (2024). Sharp v. Oppo: global rate setting in China. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 134-147). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Mishra, P. (2026). Navigating Standard Essential Patents in the 5G and IoT Era: Legal Challenges and the Way Forward. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 31, 266–277.
Opany, F. (2025). The Search for an Optimal Framework for Standard Essential Patent Licensing: An Analysis of the Proposed SEP Licensing Agency. IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 56, 715-738.
Padilla, J., & Tuffin, A. (2024). The Geopolitical Implications of Patent Holdout and the Ensuing Race to the Home Court. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 195-214). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Picht, P. G. (2023). The EU SEP Regulation: Status and Issues. SSRN Working Paper No. 4650282. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4650282
Rademacher, C. (2024). InterDigital v. Xiaomi (Germany): jurisdictional conflict and the German approach. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 391-397). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Rosenau, J. N., & Czempiel, E. O. (Eds.). (1992). Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge University Press.
Siebrasse, N. V. (2026). Microsoft v. Motorola: calculating a RAND royalty. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 5–27). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Sikorski, R. (2024). SEP-related disputes between the EU and China at the WTO. In: FRAND cases in context (pp. 409-430). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Simcoe, T. S., & Shampine, A. L. (2018). Economics of patents and standardization: network effects, hold-up, hold-out, stacking. In: Contreras, J. L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law (pp. 101-124). Cambridge University Press.
Slaughter, A. M. (2003). A Global Community of Courts. Harvard International Law Journal, 44(1), 191–219.
Slaughter, A. M. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton University Press.
Sokol, D. D., & Zheng, W. (2020). FRAND (and Industrial Policy) in China. In: Contreras, J. L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: Competition, Antitrust, and Patents (pp. 307-320). Cambridge University Press.
Teece, D. J. (2021). Restoring and Revitalizing Technology Markets for Mobile Wireless. In: 5G and Beyond: Intellectual Property and Competition Policy in the Internet of Things (pp. 1-33).
Tsilikas, H. (2021). Anti-suit injunctions for standard-essential patents: the emerging gap in international patent enforcement. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 16(7), 729-737.
Zhang, Y., Li, J., & Yang, W. (2024). The dilemma and improvement of anti-suit injunctions in standard-essential patent litigation in China. Computer Law & Security Review, 52, 105929.
II. institutional reports and working documents
European Commission. (2023). Commission Staff Working Document: Impact Assessment Report Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation on standard essential patents (SWD(2023) 124 final). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52023SC0124.
European Commission. (2023). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on standard essential patents and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 (COM(2023) 232 final). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023PC0232.
Lumenci. (2025). Qualcomm Patent Portfolio Analysis. Lumenci, 26 May 2025. Available at: https://lumenci.com/patent-portfolio/qualcomm/
Shivakumar, S. (2022). Securing Intellectual Property for Innovation and National Security. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
III. case law and arbitral decisions
Lenovo Group Limited & Ors v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 182.
Panasonic Holdings Corp v. Xiaomi Technology UK Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1143.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd v ZTE Corporation [2026] EWHC 999 (Pat).
Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat).
Unwired Planet International Ltd v. Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd [2020] UKSC 37.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2025). China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU – Award of the Arbitrators (WT/DS611/ARB25). Available at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds611_e.htm.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2026 Adán González Ulloa
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Declaro ser inédito o presente artigo, bem como não estar o mesmo sujeito a qualquer outro processo de submissão para outra revista científica.
Declaro que autorizo a publicação do artigo pela revista na rede mundial de computadores e do conhecimento sobre a não remuneração em virtude de sua publicação, não cabendo nenhum direito autoral de cunho patrimonial.
Ainda, na condição de autor, assumo a responsabilidade civil e penalmente pelo conteúdo do trabalho publicado, após ter lido as diretrizes para autores e ter concordado com elas.
O trabalho pode ser acessado por qualquer interessado e reproduzido e/ou publicado desde que seja realizada a devida referência de acordo com a ABNT com a finalidade de divulgação da produção acadêmico científico.
