Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

A Standard Essential Patent (SEP) is a patent protecting a technology that has been declared essential for the implementation of a technical standard adopted by a standardisation body The interplay between patents and standards is important for innovation and growth, as these patents incentivise research and development and enable an adequate return on investment for innovative companies. Standards ensure a broad uptake of interoperable and secure technologies among businesses and consumers. Worldwide, there are around 75 000 SEPs, but these only represent a small share of patents as a whole. Essential technology standards such as 5G and Wi-Fi, photo formats (JPEG), standards for audio and video compression and decompression (e.g. MPEG, HEVC) and more are covered by such patents. SEPS play a crucial role in developments such as the Internet of Things, Industry 4.0, connected vehicles, smart cities and climate change mitigation technologies. The number of SEPs has increased sixfold over the last ten years, which is good news, given that the protection of SEPs is key to enabling innovation that helps the EU to become more sustainable and more digital.

As early as November 2021, in its resolution on an intellectual property action plan to support the EU’s recovery and resilience (EP resolution on the intellectual property action plan), the European Parliament called for a European Commission proposal on SEPs, as SEPs are often the subject of litigation. The lack of transparency and legal certainty was identified as an issue. The licensing of SEPs is often a lengthy and costly exercise for both patent holders and technology implementers.

Ordinary patent holders are free to decide to whom they wish to grant a licence to exploit their innovation. However, SEP holders do not have this complete freedom, as the inclusion of their patented technology in a standard gives them some degree of market power. Therefore, SEP holders are obliged to grant their licences on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. These FRAND terms have led to a large number of problems, which have also been the subject of court proceedings.

On the one hand, it is near impossible for implementers to find out whether a standard is indeed essential, how many SEPs relate to a given standard, who the corresponding SEP holders are and what the ultimate costs to achieve market entry using the relevant standard will be. Around 84% of SEP implementers are SMEs. For them in particular, the mere threat of a provisional injunction leading to a suspension of production of allegedly infringing products and the probability of legal proceedings may create pressure to agree to a licence at rates that may not be FRAND.

On the other hand, the SEP holder cannot enforce his legitimate interests while the implementer insists on having a licence issued on FRAND terms, with the intention of putting off the obligation to pay royalties for as long as possible. As a result, SEP holders also face lengthy and costly court proceedings, with royalties only being paid at the end of this prolonged procedure.

In order to provide a better factual basis for preventing, resolving and deciding on conflicts relating to FRAND terms, on 27 April 2023, the European Commission submitted a proposal with the following new measures:

1. the establishment of an SEP register and a central electronic database for SEPs;

2. SEP essentiality checks;

3. non-binding determination of the aggregate royalty for a standard;

4. the establishment of a time-limited out-of-court dispute resolution mechanism under expert guidance that can be used by SEP holders and implementers when negotiating a FRAND licence.

In general, the rapporteur supports the Commission’s initiative and the proposed measures, as the Commission has acted in accordance with the EP resolution on the intellectual property action plan.

The rapporteur stresses the importance of increasing the proposal’s legal clarity and bridging the interests of SEP holders and implementers. Both actors play a huge role in the European economy and their interests must therefore be taken into account in the context of a well-balanced legislative act. The proposal must increase the transparency of SEPs in order to compensate for the knowledge advantage of SEP holders, yet without limiting their global competitiveness.

More legal clarity

Knowing which use cases of standards fall under the new legislation is massively important for legal clarity. While the rapporteur agrees that the Commission should address this issue through delegated acts, she believes it is crucial that certain criteria be established already now. For this reason, the rapporteur has proposed amendments to this effect, including a definition of ‘significant difficulties or inefficiencies’.

The rapporteur has also incorporated new definitions which make the text easier to understand.

Creation of a competence centre within the EUIPO and registration

The rapporteur considers that establishing a competence centre at the EUIPO is a sensible proposal, given that the European executive agency has a lot of experience in maintaining databases. It is important that this agency is equipped with sufficient staff and funds to carry out the new task efficiently.

Furthermore, the rapporteur notes the importance of clarifying the difference between the register and the database, of ensuring the accuracy of the register and of preventing potential red tape for SEP holders.

Patent Pools

The rapporteur is in favour of patent pools. If managed in a transparent manner, they provide great added value for SEP holders and implementers. It should however be ensured that this transparency is actually reflected in the information provided, including on the website. To support this, the rapporteur has put forward proposals to that effect.

Essentiality checks

In the EP resolution on an intellectual property action plan, the EP called for an independent, neutral and transparent system for third party essentiality checks. The rapporteur welcomes the fact that the European Commission has taken this on board and proposed a system for assessing the essentiality of patents.

It should be noted that evaluators and conciliators in the FRAND determination procedure should possess the necessary and highly specialised expertise and experience while also being independent and impartial.

In addition, evaluators should also be able to review prior essentiality checks if they have doubts as to their accuracy.

Determination of aggregate royalty

The non-binding determination of the aggregate royalty will help stakeholders to set efficient SEP rates.

The rapporteur believes that it should not be possible to unilaterally block this assessment and has therefore proposed amendments to this effect.

Time-limited out-of-court dispute resolution mechanism

In the EP resolution on an intellectual property action plan, the Commission was also asked to provide more clarity on various aspects of FRAND, and to consider possible incentives for more efficient SEP licensing negotiations and reducing litigation. It also took this request on board, proposing a non-binding dispute resolution system, which has the potential to eliminate strategic delays caused by market participants. The rapporteur welcomes the fact that, on the basis of a third party opinion, this market participant can be asked to provide a security in a very timely manner and realistic and effective in scale.

At the same time, the rapporteur believes that while proceedings are still ongoing, the parties should not yet be obliged to make a binding decision on whether or not they should comply with the outcome of the procedure. The parties should be able to make such a decision only after learning the outcome of the dispute resolution mechanism.

In addition, the rapporteur believes that parallel proceedings should only lead to the termination of the dispute resolution mechanism if the other party so wishes. This is to prevent the procedure from being stopped on account of legal action in a third country.

Micro and small and medium enterprises

In some future-oriented SEP sectors, such as the Internet of Things, 85% of companies are MSMEs. MSMEs usually have limited human and financial resources and therefore the rapporteur strengthens the Commission’s proposals in this regard. She proposes the establishment of a one-stop shop for MSMEs within the competence centre. MSMEs that are SEP implementers should be offered free information on what licences they need for their products or services and how to obtain them. MSMEs that are SEP holders should be offered free information on how to better identify potential licensees and how to effectively enforce their rights. However, this help should only benefit MSMEs whose business models are not solely based on asserting patents.

Assessment of the new instruments

These proposed instruments have the potential to make SEP licensing significantly more efficient. They can reduce inefficiencies and transaction costs in licensing, thereby facilitating licensing negotiations, speeding up their outcomes and reducing costly and laborious litigation procedures. This would make the EU single market a more attractive location for industry standard-setting innovation. However, as the proposed measures also have an impact at global level, the rapporteur believes that the impact on the competitiveness of European SEP holders at global level and on innovation in Europe should also be examined in more detail. If the outcome of this review indicates a negative impact, the Commission should propose appropriate amendments where necessary.