Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog

Editor: D. Daniel Sokol
University of Florida
Levin College of Law

Tuesday, January 9, 2018

IP LeadershIP Brussels: Highlights and Economic Analysis

Kirti Gupta, Qualcomm, Inc., Koren W. Wong-Ervin, Qualcomm Incorporated, Joseph V. Coniglio, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Dylan P. Naegele, George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School summarize IP LeadershIP Brussels: Highlights and Economic Analysis.

ABSTRACT: In September 2017, IP LeadershIP held its first conference in Europe. The event, which was attended by government enforcers and policymakers, practitioners, and scholars, featured diverse views on topics such as: • The importance of striking the right balance between the interests of technology contributors and technology implementers; • Possible adverse consequences on innovation and prices for consumers of deterring participation in open, collaborative standards; • The role (if any) of governments in shaping the intellectual property rights (IPRs) policies of private standard-development organizations (SDOs); • Proper antitrust analysis in matters involving standard-essential patents (SEPs) where a patent holder has made a commitment to license on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms; • Whether small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are able to meaningfully participate in, and benefit from, standard-development activities; and • The issue of at what level in the distribution chain licensing should occur, particularly for the Internet of Things (IoT). This article provides key highlights from the conference, as well as economic analyses of the various topics discussed.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2018/01/ip-leadership-brussels-highlights-and-economic-analysis.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment