The evolution of standard essential patent litigation in India: from unfamiliar terrain to a structured forum

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18256/2238-0604.2026.v22i.5372

Palavras-chave:

Patentes essenciais para padrões; FRAND; Lei de Patentes de 1970; tutela provisória; garantia provisória; Índia.

Resumo

As normas, consciente ou inconscientemente, regem nosso cotidiano e facilitam a fabricação, a venda e o uso de produtos. Elas proporcionam viagens confortáveis, maior conforto e mantêm o mundo interconectado. As patentes são parte integrante do processo de padronização e, portanto, possuem imenso valor. Os órgãos globais de padronização estabeleceram normas para o licenciamento de padrões em termos justos, razoáveis e não discriminatórios – que são extremamente inovadores. Esses termos garantem fácil acesso a tecnologias padronizadas, ao mesmo tempo que incentivam a inovação por meio do pagamento obrigatório de royalties, em vez da monopolização. As normas são a arquitetura invisível da vida moderna, os protocolos silenciosos que permitem que um dispositivo criado por uma pessoa se comunique com uma rede construída por outra. Nos últimos anos, a Índia tornou-se parte desse ecossistema de normas, que é essencial para a maioria dos países e suas economias. Este artigo descreve como uma jurisdição que começou praticamente sem doutrina consolidada conseguiu, em pouco mais de uma década, construir um corpo jurídico coerente para essas patentes. O texto acompanha a trajetória desde as primeiras alegações hesitantes contra uma indústria que mal tinha consciência de que devia algo, até uma jurisdição consolidada onde os proprietários e implementadores de patentes essenciais para padrões (SEPs) estão bem cientes dos processos de julgamento, dos princípios legais que os vinculam e da maneira como podem obter justiça de forma justa e transparente. A Índia agora está entre as jurisdições mais neutras procuradas por proprietários e implementadores de SEPs para a resolução de suas disputas relacionadas a essas patentes.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Biografia do Autor

  • Prathiba M. Singh, Delhi High Court - Índia

    Judge, Delhi High Court - Índia.

Referências

AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL SALES PTE. LTD. v. REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORP., Unified Patent Court, 2025.

BEKKERS, R.; DUYSTERS, G.; VERSPAGEN, B. Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure. Research Policy, 31, 1141-1161, 2002. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00189-5.

Communication Components Antenna Inc. v. Mobi Antenna Technologies (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2024:DHC:3975 (final judgment of 16 May 2024 awarding damages of about Rs. 217 crore).

Communication Components Antenna Inc. v. Rosenberger Hochfrequenztechnik GmbH & Co. KG & Ors., 2023:DHC:4582 (final judgment of 30 March 2026 awarding damages of about Rs. 152 crore).

Competition Commission of India v. Monsanto Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., Supreme Court of India, SLP(C) No. 25026/2023 (order of 2 September 2025).

CYBERMEDIA RESEARCH (CMR). India Mobile Handset Market Review, Q1 2025. Available at: https://cmrindia.com.

DEL PERAL-ROSADO, J. A. et al. Survey of Cellular Mobile Radio Localization Methods: From 1G to 5G. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 20, no. 2, 1124-1148, 2018. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2017.2785181.

DHADWAL, Saloni; SINHA, Aman. Navigating SEP Licensing: A Comparison of International Approaches. ICRIER Policy Brief No. 38, May 2025. Available at: https://icrier.org.

Dolby International AB & Anr. v. Lava International Ltd., 2025:DHC:5426 (order of 10 July 2025).

Freebit AS v. Exotic Mile Private Limited, 2023:DHC:8213; appeal dismissed, FAO(OS)(COMM) 15/2024 (31 January 2024).

Fujitsu Ltd. v. Netgear Inc., 620 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

GUPTA, S.; TYAGI, K.; UPADHYAY, R. Twilight of voice, dawn of data: the future of telecommunications in India. DECISION, 45(2), 161-183, 2018. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-018-0181-0.

HIGH COURT OF DELHI. Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022, Notification No. 13/Rules/DHC, 24 February 2022 (as corrected by Corrigendum No. 63/Rules/DHC, 11 April 2022). Available at: https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/files/Notifications%20and%20Practice%20Directions/notificationfile_wd6kndkfb4g.pdf.

HIGH COURT OF DELHI. Rules Governing Patent Suits, 2022, Notification No. 14/Rules/DHC, Delhi Gazette (Extraordinary), Part II-I, 24 February 2022. Available at: https://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2022/233727.pdf.

HUANG, E. M. et al. Understanding Mobile Phone Situated Sustainability: The Influence of Local Constraints and Practices on Transferability. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 8, 46-53, 2009. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/mprv.2009.19.

INDIA. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Act No. 4 of 2016).

INDIA. The Patents Act, 1970 (Act No. 39 of 1970).

InterDigital Technology Corporation & Ors. v. Xiaomi Corporation & Ors., 2021 SCC OnLine Del 2424 (anti-anti-suit injunction).

InterDigital Technology Corporation v. Guangdong Oppo, 2024:DHC:1338; and Guangdong Oppo v. InterDigital, 2024:DHC:4547-DB.

InterDigital Technology Corporation v. Guangdong Oppo, 2024:DHC:7244 (disclosure of comparable licences).

InterDigital Technology Corporation v. Xiaomi Corporation, 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1633 (confidentiality club).

Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, 2023:DHC:2243-DB.

JONES, A. Standard-Essential Patents: FRAND Commitments, Injunctions and the Smartphone Wars. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2394495.

K.K. Bansal v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V., 2026:DHC:4317-DB (setting aside the judgment of 12 July 2018).

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v. Rajesh Bansal & Ors., 2018:DHC:4111, set aside by the Division Bench in K.K. Bansal v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V., 2026:DHC:4317-DB.

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. M. Bathla & Anr., 2025:DHC:9079 (the first reported finding of non-infringement in an Indian SEP dispute).

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Maj. (Retd.) Sukesh Behl & Ors., 2025:DHC:1144.

Lava International Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL), 2024:DHC:2698; costs order of 2 August 2024.

MALIK, Payal; SINHA, Aman; DHADWAL, Saloni; SAREEN, Jayati; JAGADEESH, Harishankar. Cellular Network Standard Essential Patents: A Study of the Indian Ecosystem. ICRIER, September 2025. Available at: https://icrier.org/pdf/Cellular-Network-Standard-Essential-Patents_A%20Study-of-the-Indian-Ecosystem.pdf.

Malikie Innovations Ltd. & Anr. v. Xiaomi Corporation & Ors., 2026:DHC:3671 (order of 30 April 2026, directing pro tem security of about Rs. 272 crore).

Nokia Technologies Oy v. Guangdong Oppo, 2022:DHC:4935 (the four-fold test, paragraph 77).

Nokia Technologies Oy v. Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. & Ors., 2024:DHC:1291 (Division Bench, directing pro tem security).

Panasonic Holdings Corporation v. Xiaomi Technology UK Ltd., [2024] EWCA Civ 1143.

PAWLICKI, P. Challenger Multinationals in Telecommunications: Huawei and ZTE. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2934191.

PRESS INFORMATION BUREAU, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. Building a Viksit Bharat with 6G. PRID 2182603, October 2025. Available at: https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2182603.

RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, N. Report on the Revision of the Patents Law. Government of India, September 1959. Available at: https://ipindia.gov.in/storage/uploads/media/1959-_Justice_N_R_Ayyangar_committee_report.pdf.

SIDAK, J. Gregory. FRAND in India: The Delhi High Court’s emerging jurisprudence on royalties for standard-essential patents. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, vol. 10, no. 8, 609-618, August 2015. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpv096.

SINGH, Prathiba M. Prathiba M. Singh on Patent Law. Thomson Reuters, 2024, Vol. 1.

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Competition Commission of India, 2023:DHC:4783-DB.

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) v. Mercury Electronics & Anr., CS(OS) 442/2013 (order of 6 March 2013).

TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA. Telecom Subscription Data as on May, 2026. Press Release No. 78 of 2026, 25 June 2026. Available at: https://www.trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/2026-06/PR_No78of2026_0.pdf.

VAN DE KAA, G.; GREEVEN, M. J. Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes. Telecommunication Systems, 65, 181-192, 2017. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-016-0214-y.

Downloads

Publicado

06-07-2026

Edição

Seção

SEP - FRAND

Como Citar

SINGH, Prathiba M. The evolution of standard essential patent litigation in India: from unfamiliar terrain to a structured forum. Revista Brasileira de Direito, Passo Fundo, RS, Brasil, v. 22, 2026. DOI: 10.18256/2238-0604.2026.v22i.5372. Disponível em: https://seer.atitus.edu.br/index.php/revistadedireito/article/view/5372. Acesso em: 7 jul. 2026.