Patent Assertion Entity (PAE) is a kind of patent commercialized operating entity based on the defects of American patent system, it acquires high license fees or settlement fees through purposeful acquisition of patents, claims of rights and litigation.PAE isn’t illegal in itself, But it may limit competition and stifle innovation, which could be illegal.By analyzing possible illegal behaviors involved in PAE operation, referring to the strategies and measures of the United States in dealing with PAE, it is proposed that China should carry out PAE prevention from three aspects: Pay attention to the root cause of governance, through the improvement of China's patent system, to curb the power and ability of PAE abuse; Perfect patent law and anti-monopoly law to strengthen the ex post regulation of PAE; The government should play an active role in guidance and propaganda, enterprises should comprehensively improve the coping ability to deploy PAEs coping strategies in advance.
Luo Rongrong
. A Review of the Legitimacy of Patent Assertion Entity in the United States and the Countermeasures of China[J]. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2020
, 37(4)
: 137
-146
.
DOI: 10.6049/kjjbydc.2019050524
[1] Unified Patent.2018 patent dispute report[R].Washington D.C.:Unified Patent, 2018.
[2] 杨延超,吴烁.防止“专利流氓”对创新的阻碍[N].经济参考报,2018-01-17.
[3] FTC.The evolving IP market place:aligning patent notice and remedies with competition[R].Washington D.C.:Federal Trade Commission, 2011.
[4] SCOTT MORTON F M, SHAPIRO C.Strategic patent acquisition[J].Antitrust Law Journal,2014,79(2):463-500.
[5] 35 U.S.C.101-103[Z].2011.
[6] GENE S.Taking on patent trolls to protect american innovation[EB/OL].Washington:whitehouse,2013[2013-08-09].http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/06/04/takingpatent-trolls-protect-american-innovation.
[7] COHEN L, GURUN U G, KOMINERS S D.Patent trolls:evidence from targeted firms[EB/OL].Cambridge:National Bureau of Economic Research,2014[2016-08-07]https://www.nber.org/papers/w20322.
[8] FTC.Patent assertion entity activity[R].Washington D.C.:Federal Trade Commission, 2016.
[9] POPOFSKY M S, LAUFERT M D.Antitrust attacks on patent assertion entities[J].Antitrust Law Journal,2014,79(2):445-462.
[10] EWING T, ROBIN F.The giants among US[J].Stanford Technology Law Review, 2012(1):26.
[11] JUSTIN R.Patent aggregation:models, harms, and the limited role of antitrust[J].Berkeley Tech.L.J,2013,28:525-545.
[12] Cascades computer innovation LLC v.RPX Corp., 2013 WL 316023[Z].2013.
[13] MONTANO J.Mosaid acquires 2000 Nokia patents to monetize Nokia IP[EB/OL].http://mynokiablog.com/2011/09/01/mosaid-acquires-2000-nokia-patents-to-generate-more-revenue/,[2014-03-07].
[14] 许光耀,肖静.《谢尔曼法》第 2条意义上的“垄断”[J].时代法学, 2010,8(5):104-106.
[15] MELIN P.Patent assertion entity activities workshop--session 2/4[EB/OL].Washington:FTC,2012[2017-3-23].http://www.ftc.gov/video-library/index.php/ftc-events/patent-assertion-entity-activities-session-24/2028431449001.
[16] 罗蓉蓉.技术标准制定中垄断行为的规制及对策研究[J].法学杂志,2013(10):103-105.
[17] 丁道勤,杨晓娇.标准化中的专利挟持问题研究[J].法律科学（西北政法大学学报）,2011(4):128-137.
[18] 华为诉美国IDC终审宣判：IDC构成垄断赔2000万[EB/OL].北京:人民网,2013[2015-05-27].http://ip.people.com.cn/n/2013/1029/c136655-23359806.
[19] 美国IDC公司承诺不再就中国企业专利许可费“漫天要价”[EB/OL].北京:人民网,[2017-06-02].http://finance.people.com.cn/n/2014/0219/c70846-24408516.html.
[20] FTC.FTC settlement bars patent assertion entity from using deceptive tactics[EB/OL].Washington D.C.:FTC,2014[2017-08-23].https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/11/ftc-settlement-bars-patent-assertion-entity-using-deceptive.
[21] FTC.FTC approves final order barring patent assertion entity from using deceptive tactics[EB/OL].WashingtonD.C.:FTC,2015,[2017-8-24].https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/03/ftc-approves-final-order-barring-patent-assertion-entity-using.
[22] 张鹏.美国专利再审查制度评析[J].比较法研究,2014(11):170-180.
[23] RPX.2014 NPE litigation report[R].San Francisco:RPX Corporation,2015.
[24] RPX.RPX data update:patent litigation volatility persists as strategies shift[EB/OL].San Francisco:RPX Corporation,2015.[2018-5-23].http://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/rpx-data-update-patent-litigation-volatility-persists-as-strategies-shift.
[25] 吴艳.论美国打击专利投机的政策和措施[J].科学管理研究, 2014,32(2):118-119.
[26] 易继明.美国《创新法案》评析[J].环球法律评论, 2014(4):149-153.
[27] 谢光旗.美国应对“专利蟑螂”最新法律实践述评[J].电子知识产权,2016(3):69-78.
[28] AHMED J D, KAROLINA J.The balance of power in patent law:moving towards effectiveness in addressing patent troll concerns[J].Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, 2012,22(4):835-852.
[29] Mercexchange, LLC v.eBay, Inc., 401 Fed.Cir[Z].2005.
[30] DIESSEL B H.Trolling for trolls:the pitfalls of the emerging market competition requirement for permanent injunctions in patent cases post-ebay[J].Michigan Law Review, 2007,106(2):305-346.
[31] In re Seagate Techn., LLC, 497 F.3d 1360, 1371[Z].2007.
[32] 金海军.美国最高法院2016年度知识产权判例解析[J].知识产权, 2017(9):67-88.
[33] RPX.2018 patent litigation and marketplace overview[EB/OL].San Francisco:RPX Corporation,2018.[2019-1-13].http://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/2018-patent-litigation-and-marketplace-overview/.
[34] 朱敏.Darts-ip:美国境外NPE诉讼案件量快速增长[EB/OL].北京:中国科学院,[2019-4-10].http://www.casip.ac.cn/website/ipr/iprnewsview/1382.
[35] 管荣齐.论非实施性专利权主体的权利和行为限制[J].法律科学,2019(3):147-156.
[36] 吕磊,江平.美国专利主张实体的运营模式、诉讼策略及应对措施研究[J].科技进步与对策,2019,36(9):126-132.
[37] 国家知识产权局.国家知识产权局2018年主要工作统计数据及有关情况新闻发布会[EB/OL].北京:国家知识产权局,[2019-02-03].http://www.cnipa.gov.cn/twzb/gjzscqj2018nzygztjsjjygqkxwfbk/index.htm.
[38] 叶若思,祝建军,陈文全.标准必要专利权人滥用市场支配地位构成垄断的认定——评华为公司诉美国IDC公司垄断纠纷案[J].电子知识产权,2013(3):46-52.
公众号