|
|
|
| Litigation Risk of Standard-essential Patent from the Perspective of TOE Configuration |
| Zhang Yurong |
| (Intellectual Property Academy, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the rapid development of 5G, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and other new generations of information technologies, the new technological revolution has brought the economy and society into the digital age.In this context, China has strengthened the institutional construction of standardization and intellectual property.For example, China released a 15-year plan (2021—2035) on the development of intellectual property rights (IPR) power.The plan demands stricter IPR protection, greater market value of IPR, better coordinated development of technology, patents, and standards, and fuller use of standard-essential patents (SEP).In recent years, Huawei, Xiaomi, ZTE, and other Chinese companies have also been frequently involved in international SEP litigation disputes, and these companies face great litigation risks when entering the international market.Since SEP combines technology and standards, the litigation behavior of enterprises is not caused by a single factor but is the result of multiple complicating factors that are related to patent technology innovation, enterprise strategy, the national policy environment, etc.#br#Different from the single perspective of existing research, this study draws on the configuration perspective under the technology-organization-environment framework of TOE theoretical analysis and selects the most representative five specific indicators from the three levels of technology, organization, and environment.It adopts fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to study the risk factors of SEP litigation from the perspective of configuration and finds out the formation path of SEP litigation by analyzing the combination of different factors.A total of 207 litigation cases involving SEP from 2003 to 2020 in the United States are selected as samples based on the Westlaw database, and the evaluation indicators are selected from three aspects by combining the TOE theoretical framework with cases.Specifically, at the technical level, the three indicators, including the number of patent citations, claims, and transfers, are mainly obtained through the IPlytics SEP database and the United States Patent and Trademark Office according to the patent number of the SEP recorded in each case.Organization-level indicators come from the official websites of each enterprise, the Stanford NPE litigation database, the Compusat database, LinkedIn, etc., which include the types of enterprises, the number of employees, and the time of establishment of the right-holder enterprises.The extraction of environmental level indicators involves the friendliness of the United States to the patentees of SEP.In order to observe the change of friendliness to right holders in different time periods, various policies on SEP issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the United States Department of Justice, as well as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in the past 15 years were collected.The risk of SEP litigation is affected synthetically by the value of the patents, the enterprises' types, scales and ages, and the friendliness of the national environment to the right holders.When the scale of the emerging enterprise is smaller or the value of SEP held by enterprises is smaller, companies will face higher litigation risks.When the size of the non-NPE company is larger, or the value of SEP held is higher, and the judicial environment is friendly to the right holders, there will be a higher litigation risk.Even if the NPE company is small, the value of SEP is relatively low, and the judicial environment is not friendly to the right holder, there is still high risk of litigation.Although the venues in the sample cases are all in the United States, the litigant involves global enterprises.#br#The paper provides reference for enterprises to evaluate and prevent the risk of SEP litigation.Enterprises can strengthen the strategic layout and effective application of SEP according to specific conditions, assess and warn of possible litigation risks, make targeted patent portfolios, and respond to litigation in advance.This paper has its own limitations.Future research can add conditional variables of different dimensions, such as the number of patent classifications, the number of licenses, corporate performance, and lawsuit efficiency to conduct more extensive research on the impact of litigation risk in the future.#br#
|
|
Received: 15 June 2023
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] CONTRERAS J L.The new extraterritoriality: FRAND royalties,anti-suit injunctions and the global race to the bottom in disputes over standards-essential patents[J].Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law,2019,25(2): 251-290.
[2] BEKKERS R,UPDEGROVE A.A study of IPR policies and practices of a representative group of Standards Setting Organizations worldwide[EB/OL].[2022-09-20].http://ssrn.com/abstract=2333445.2013.
[3] ERNST D.Standard-essential patents within global networks-an emerging economies perspective[EB/OL].[2022-09-20].https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2873198.2017.
[4] CONTRERAS J L.Essentiality and standards-essential patents[M]// CONTRERAS J L.Cambridge handbook of technical standardization law-patent,antitrust and competition law.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2017: 550-614.
[5] CREMERS K.Determinants of patent litigation in Germany[R].ZEW-Centre for European economic research discussion paper No.04-072,https://ssrn.com/abstract=604467.2004.
[6] 张米尔,国伟,李海鹏.专利动态特征与专利诉讼:基于智能手机产业的研究[J].管理科学,2020,33(4):98-106.
[7] SIMCOE T S,GRAHAM S J H,FELDMAN M P.Competing on standards? entrepreneurship,intellectual property,and platform technologies[J].Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,2009,18(3): 775-816.
[8] BEKKERS R,CATALINI C,MARTINELLI A,et al.Disclosure rules and declared essential patents[EB/OL].[2022-07-25].https://www.nber.org/papers/w23627.2017.
[9] 齐立文,宋晓亭,姜南.标准必要专利企业的诉讼策略研究——以华为公司涉诉案为例[J].科技管理研究,2021,41(10):178-184.
[10] 詹爱岚,王洁怡.面向新一代ICT产业竞争的标准必要专利战略启示及应对[J].情报杂志,2019,38(5):29-35.
[11] TORNATZKY L G,FLEISCHER M.The processes of technological innovation[M].Lexington,MA:Lexington Books,1990.
[12] BAKER J.The technology-organization-environment framework[M]//DWIVEDI Y K.Information Systems Theory.New York:Springer,2012:231-245.
[13] 刘茂长,鞠晓峰.基于TOE模型的电子商务技术扩散影响因素研究[J].信息系统学报,2012,6(2):13-30.
[14] HIGHAM K,RASSENFOSSE G D,JAFFE A B.Patent quality: towards a systematic framework for analysis and measurement[J].Research Policy,2021,50(4): 104215.
[15] ALLISON J R,LEMLEY M,MOORE K A,et al.Valuable patents[C].Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics,2003: 435-479.
[16] HALL B H,JAFFE A,TRAJTENBERG M.Market value and patent citations[J].RAND Journal of Economics,2005,36(1): 16-38.
[17] GAMBARDELLA A,HARHOFF D,VERSPAGEN B.The value of European patents[J].European Management Review,2008,5(2): 69-84.
[18] HARHOFF D,SCHERER F M,VOPEL K.Citations,family size,opposition and the value of patent rights[J].Research Policy,2003,32(8): 1343-1363.
[19] WAGNER S,WAKEMAN S.What do patent-based measures tell us about product commercialization? evidence from the pharmaceutical industry[J].Research Policy,2016,45(5): 1091-1102.
[20] 李欣,范明姐,黄鲁成.基于机器学习的专利质量评价研究[J].科技进步与对策,2020,37(24):116-124.
[21] RPX.Q3 in review:the PTAB reaches an inflection point as DOJ touts new "balanced" SEP policy[EB/OL].https://www.rpxcorp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/10/RPX-Q3-in-Review-October-2021.
[22] RAGIN C C.Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond[M].Chicago: University of Chicago Press,2008.
[23] URUENA A,ARENAS A E,HIDALGO A.Understanding workers′ adoption of productivity mobile applications: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)[J].Economic Research,2018,31(1): 967-981.
[24] RIHOUX B,RAGIN C C.Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and related techniques[M].London: Sage Publications,2009.
[25] CONTRERAS J L.Assertion of standards-essential patents by Non-Practicing Entities[EB/OL].[2022-05-15].https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2700117.2018.
[26] FISS P C.Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research[J].Academy of Management Journal,2011,54(2): 393-420.
[27] CHURCHILL N C,LEWIS V L.Small businesses,the economy,and high interest rates: impacts and actions taken in response[J].Harvard Business Review,1983,3(61): 30-50.
[28] PAPPAS I O,WOODSIDE A G.Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA): guidelines for research practice in information systems and marketing[J].International Journal of Information Management,2021,58(3):1-23.
[29] SCHNEIDER M R,SCHULZE-BENTROP C,PAUNESCU M.Mapping the institutional capital of high-tech firms: a fuzzy-set analysis of capitalist variety and export performance[J].Journal of International Business Studies,2010,41(2): 246-266.
[30] RAGIN C C.Redesigning social inquiry:fuzzy sets and beyond[J].Social Forces,2009,88(4):1936-1938.
[31] FISS P C.Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research[J].Academy of Management Journal,2011,54(2): 393-420.
|
|
|
|
