Activities at ITU in the field of IPR and standards since GSC-17 Antoine Dore, Senior Legal Officer International Telecommunication Union Global Standards.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
GSC: Standardization Advancing Global Communications Towards a Common ITU/ISO/IEC Patent Policy by Masamichi Niiya Telecommunication Standardization Bureau.
Advertisements

Slovenian experience MEASURES TO STRENGHTEN THE CIVIL DIALOGUE AND PARTNERSHIP Irma Mežnarič Brussels - 10 October 2006.
International Telecommuniction Regulations 1 WG-ITR Council Working Group on ITRs General Overview Alaa M. Fahmy Chairman.
ITU WORKSHOP ON STANDARDS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) ISSUES Session 5: Software copyright issues Dirk Weiler, Chairman of ETSI General Assembly.
Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, July 2009 "Update on Activities of the TIA IPR Standing Committee since GSC-13" Amy Marasco TIA Delegation.
Footer text (edit in View : Header and Footer) The interface between Standards and IPRs The ETSI IPR Policy Dr. Michael Fröhlich ETSI Legal Adviser Copyright.
SDO and Patent Offices : EPO view on cooperation Dr Michel Goudelis, Director Telecommunications, EPO GSC-15, August 2010 Beijing, China.
International Telecommunication Union New Delhi, India, December 2011 ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues Dr.
Jeju, 13 – 16 May 2013Standards for Shared ICT Latest developments in the field of IPR since GSC-16bis Antoine DORE Senior Legal Officer International.
Non-governmental Actors in the Compliance with and Monitoring of Multilateral Environmental Decisions.
Halifax, 31 Oct – 3 Nov 2011ICT Accessibility For All 2011 IN REVIEW: ITU’S ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF STANDARDIZATION & IPR Antoine Dore, Senior Legal.
China’s Approach to Standards-related Intellectual Property Rights Development – Legal Framework and Implementation “Standards and Innovation Policy in.
GSC: Standardization Advancing Global Communications 1 Summary of issues and results from GSC-11 IPR WG Dan Bart, TIA Chair IPR WG SOURCE:Dan Bart, IPR.
An Introduction to CCSA IPR Policy
The WIPO Development Agenda: An Overview Geneva May, 2009 Esteban Burrone World Intellectual Property Organization.
DOCUMENT #:GSC15-IPR-06 FOR:Presentation SOURCE:CCSA AGENDA ITEM:6 Situations of Communications Standards and IPR in China.
Summary of GSC-15 IPR WG Meeting Alan Fan Zhiyong IPR WG Chair DOCUMENT #:GSC15-CL-05 FOR:Presentation SOURCE:Alan Fan Zhiyong, IPR WG Chairperson AGENDA.
Standards and innovation What is a standard? How do standards promote innovation? What is the role of governments and the UN?
Halifax, 31 Oct – 3 Nov 2011ICT Accessibility For All ATIS Intellectual Property Rights Activities 2011 – An Update Thomas Goode General Counsel, ATIS.
TSB 1 Overview of the TSB Director’s Ad Hoc Group on IPR GSC 9, Seoul, Korea, 9 – 1 3 May 2004 by Houlin Zhao Director, Telecommunication Standardization.
Creating the global research village EU Procurement Nicola Anson, DANTE TF-MSP Meeting, 1 March 2011.
Making South Africa a Global Leader in Harnessing ICTs for Socio-economic Development SECRET 1 PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS:
Halifax, 31 Oct – 3 Nov 2011ICT Accessibility For All SMART GRID ICT: SECURITY, INTEROPERABILITY & NEXT STEPS John O’Neill, Senior Project Manager CSA.
Preliminary Report 9 October  Whereas a well-educated, informed and active union membership contributes to healthy, democratic decision-making;
GSC-8xxx SOURCE:TIA TITLE:IPR Working Group Report AGENDA ITEM:Closing Plenary Agenda Item 1.1 DECISION DISCUSSIONX INFORMATIONX 21/10/2015 Report on the.
Management of Intellectual Property Rights in Countries in Transition and Relevant WIPO Studies for Countries in Transition Budapest, April 15 and 16,
Implementing the WIPO Development Agenda: Comparing National Approaches to Promoting Coherence Between Public Policy Objectives and IP Laws ICTSD Roundtable.
1 FRAND COMMITMENTS AND EU COMPETITION LAW Thomas Kramler European Commission, DG Competition (The views expressed are not necessarily those of the European.
TSB 1 Overview of TSB Director’s Ad Hoc Group on IPR GSC 8, Ottawa, Canada, 27 April – 1 May 2003 by Houlin Zhao Director, Telecommunication Standardization.
Efforts by two leading standards-setting organizations to clarify the effect of a F/RAND licensing commitment in connection with Standard-Essential Patents.
Overview of the TSB Director ’ s Ad Hoc Group on IPR Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) International Telecommunication Union Place des Nations.
International Telecommunication Union New Delhi, India, December 2011 ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues Philip.
Overview of Issues and Interests in Standards and Interoperability Mary Saunders Chief, Standards Services Division NIST.
Durban, South Africa, 8 July 2013 Outcome of WTSA-12 on spam Xiaoya Yang, Head, WTSA Programmes Division ITU-TSB ITU Workshop on “Countering.
IPRs and ITU-T Presentation at SG-17 Nikos Volanis – Legal Officer 10 September 2015.
SDOs and Patent Offices : Towards a better interface Dr Michel Goudelis, Director Telecommunications, EPO GSC-14, July 2009 Geneva, Switserland.
Slide title 70 pt CAPITALS Slide subtitle minimum 30 pt Standard essential patents And frand licensing – the need for a balanced approach Ulrika Wester,
Geneva, Oct 8, 2012 Latest developments in the field of IPR since GSC-16 Antoine DORE Senior Legal Officer, ITU Document No: GSC16bis-IPR-10 Source: ITU.
IP Offices and the Implementation of the WIPO Development Agenda: Challenges and Opportunities September 18, 2009 Geneva Irfan Baloch World Intellectual.
1 WIPO-KIPO-KIPA IP Panorama Business School, October 6 to 10, 2008 IP Strategies in Standards Setting Tomoko Miyamoto Senior Counsellor, Patent Law Section.
Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, July 2009 Summary of GSC-14 IPR WG Meeting Antoine Dore, ITU IPR WG Chair Global Standards Collaboration.
Biotechnology / Life Sciences Ensuring Access Christina Sampogna July 2005 CASRIP – University of Washington, Seattle *Views expressed are those of the.
Geneva, October 9, 2012 Summary of GSC-16bis IPR WG Meeting Greg Ratta, ITU IPR WG Rapporteur Document No: GSC-16bis-IPR-12 Source: IPR WG Rapporteur Contact:
TIA IPR Standing Committee Report to TIA Technical Committee “Normative References and IPR” October 21, 2005 Paul Vishny, Chair Dan Bart, TIA.
NATIONAL CONFERENCE Intellectual Property Policies for Universities and Innovation dr. sc. Vlatka Petrović Head, Technology Transfer Office Acting Head,
Public health, innovation and intellectual property 1 |1 | The Global Strategy on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property Technical Briefing.
ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) issues IPR in ICT standards View ’ s of the European Commission Anne Lehouck New Delhi,
19-20 October 2010 IT Directors’ Group meeting 1 Item 6 of the agenda ISA programme Pascal JACQUES Unit B2 - Methodology/Research Local Informatics Security.
Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration) Multinational enterprises and social policy.
Summary of GSC-13 IPR WG Meeting Tom Goode, ATIS IPR WG Chair DOCUMENT #:GSC13-CL-05r1 FOR:Presentation SOURCE:Tom Goode, IPR WG Chair AGENDA ITEM:3.4.
Fifteenth Board Meeting Geneva, April 2007 Ethics Committee Annual Report Professor Sheila Dinoshe Tlou, M.P., POH (Chair) Dr Brian Brink (Vice Chair)
Halifax, 31 Oct – 3 Nov 2011ICT Accessibility For All Dirk Weiler Chairman of the ETSI IPR Special Committee Document No: GSC16-IPR-02 Source: ETSI Contact:
International Telecommunication Union New Delhi, India, December 2011 ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues Antoine.
Update on SDO IPR Policy Debates
ITC - ETUC European Sectoral Social Dialogue in the construction industry Werner Buelen Tel : 02/ (ext.45)
Objectives of WHO's collaboration with NGOs
Standards and Intellectual Property Rights in ITU
INTERCONNECTION GUIDELINES
Business sector engagement and Consumer Awareness October 3rd, 2017
National Contact Points (NCP) Training
SDOs and Patent Offices : Interface improvement
TTC Activities on IPR in Standards
Amy Marasco, Incoming Vice Chair, ANSI IPRPC
SDOs and Patent Offices : Interface improvement
Summary of GSC-16bis IPR WG Meeting
Summary of GSC-16 IPR WG Meeting
IEC Patent Policy Jack Sheldon IEC Standardization Strategy Manager
Summary of GSC-15 IPR WG Meeting
Towards a Common ITU/ISO/IEC Patent Policy
Summary of GSC-13 IPR WG Meeting
Presentation transcript:

Activities at ITU in the field of IPR and standards since GSC-17 Antoine Dore, Senior Legal Officer International Telecommunication Union Global Standards Collaboration Session on IPR and standards (Sofia-Antipolis, 20 April 2015)

Outline of the presentation Activities of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues Relationship with Patent Offices Other ITU activities in the field of IPR and standards

Activities of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues (background) The main tool ITU employs to safeguard a fair balance of stakeholder interests is the ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC Common Patent Policy and related Guidelines agreed in Central to the Common Patent Policy is the principle of SEP holders committing themselves to licensing their SEPs to standards implementers on a Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (RAND) basis. In October 2012, ITU convened a high-level “Patent Roundtable” to examine the effectiveness of RAND- based patent policies and to discuss whether these policies are in need of reform.

Activities of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues (background) The outcome of the Patent Roundtable saw the IPR AHG mandated to begin an accelerated series of meetings aimed at developing a recommendation to provide high-level principles clarifying: – the meaning of ‘reasonable’ in the RAND context, and – the issue of the availability of injunctive relief in the case of RAND-encumbered SEPs. In addition, the TSB Director requested the IPR AHG to provide a recommendation on the following additional issue: – the “non-discriminatory aspect” of the Patent Policy (i.e. is it possible to treat prospective licensees differently for example by refusing to license some types of standards implementers?).

Work of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues in In , the IPR AHG addressed 4 main issues: – The conditions under which companies that have made RAND commitments should (or should not) be allowed to seek injunction relief: The injunctive relief debate arises in a context where concerns have been expressed that the threat of IR may be used by SEP owners to extract supra-RAND (RAND+) royalties from implementers. – The meaning of the word "reasonable" in RAND: this debate arises in a context where some stakeholders have indicated that providing guidelines for what constitute reasonable licensing terms would be beneficial to the standards ecosystem. – The meaning of non-discrimination in RAND: the non-discrimination issue arises in a context where certain SEP owners have taken the view that prospective licensees could be treated differently, for instance by refusing to license certain types of implementers. – The transfer issue: stakeholders have taken the view that there was a need to strengthen and streamline the current rules regarding the transfer of patents.

Work of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues in Unanimous agreement was reached on one proposed amendment to the Patent Guidelines, as well as the addition of related text to the declaration form, to clarify that the RAND commitment is intended to bind both the patent holder and subsequent purchasers of the patents. This recommendation was further approved by TSAG and RAG in June In February 2015, the ITU proposal on the transfer issue was examined by ISO and IEC. Both organizations decided to: – endorse the transfer principle; – request their respective Secretaries-General to liaise with ITU with a view to developing common language that would be widely understood by ISO/IEC technical experts; – recommend that the Patent Declaration Forms be modified using the text proposed by ITU.

Work of the TSB Director’s AHG on IPR issues in Regarding the three other issues, TSAG requested that discussion should continue in the IPR AHG to try to resolve such issues, and a report be presented to the 2015 session of TSAG on the results achieved. Since the June 2014 TSAG meeting, the IPR AHG has met on three occasions (December 2014, February and April 2015). The discussion has enabled a better understanding of the issue although the IPR AHG was unable to provide a consensus recommendation to the TSB Director. The 2-5 June 2015 TSAG meeting will review the report from the TSB Director on these issues. Member States and Sector Members have been invited to submit contributions as early as possible in advance of the next TSAG meeting with a view towards trying to find consensus.

Relationship with Patent Offices As of 2 nd quarter of 2014, each SEP in the ITU patent database is directly linked to the EPO patent database. In 2014, ITU collaborated with JPO in the context of a JPO report on the utilization of standard related documents for patent examination. ITU and JPO are currently exploring additional opportunities for collaboration.

Other ITU activities in the field of patents and standards In 2013, ITU’s annual Global Symposium for Regulators (GSR) included a session on the interplay between patents and standards The session was attended by more than 600 policy-makers and telecom regulators. In today’s world, the relationship between intellectual property rights, competition law and standardization in the ICT sector was identified as becoming increasingly relevant and important. The need to develop and distribute a manual that would provide a greater understanding on the relationship between ICT innovations, intellectual property and standards was also highlighted.

Other ITU activities in the field of patents and standards A publication entitled “Understanding patents, competition and standardization in an interconnected world” was released by ITU on July 2014.Understanding patents, competition and standardization in an interconnected world The publication provides government officials, private-sector executives and industry analysts of all disciplines with an overview of the state of play in the interrelationship of intellectual property and standardization in the ICT sphere.

Other ITU activities in the field of patents and standards Part I provides an introduction to the conceptual foundations of standardization; the purpose and impact of standardization in the ICT industry and global economy; the composition of the modern ICT standardization landscape; the principles governing standardization processes; and the possible advantages and disadvantages of technical standardization. Part II provides an introduction to patents and the requirements of patentability; the organization of the global patent system, and the challenges it is facing; the general rules and mechanisms in competition law; and how competition law is applied to standards development processes and the inclusion of patents in standards. Part III provides an introduction to SEPs; how RAND-based IPR policies aim to create and protect a fair balance between stakeholders’ varied interests; and the nature of conflict between stakeholders, both from the perspectives of patent owners and standards implementers. Part IV provides an introduction to ITU achievements in global ICT standardization; key principles and provisions of the ITU/ISO/IEC common patent policy; and the differences between the various options for licensing commitments, including reciprocity clauses.

Other ITU activities in the field of patents and standards In December 2015, ITU participated in an OECD review of recent competition issues in the ICT Sector. Four main findings (see Executive Summary of the discussion):Executive Summary – Standards encourage innovation but the incorporation of patents in ICT standards may raise potential for harm to competition. SDOs aim to mitigate these risks in their IPR policies. – Commercial disputes can arise between SEP holders and standards implementers regarding the meaning of RAND. While there is currently no generally-accepted methodology for determining RAND royalties, certain principles are emerging. – The availability of injunctions on RAND-encumbered SEPs may affect licensing negotiations with implementers, leading to holdup. Courts have dealt with these questions in many jurisdictions and competition authorities have intervened in a few cases. – Cooperation between SDOs, patent offices and competition authorities can be useful. SDOs can play an important role in this debate and there is support to continue efforts to clarify SDOs policies on RAND.