S2 - Global Standards Leadership Conference 2025 - SEP Disputes Amid Global Tech Competition скачать в хорошем качестве

S2 - Global Standards Leadership Conference 2025 - SEP Disputes Amid Global Tech Competition

The second session of this year’s Global Standards Leadership Conference began by examining the varying interpretations of FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) obligations across global jurisdictions and the increasingly important role courts play in SEP (Standard Essential Patent) licensing and enforcement. Collette Rawnsley, Senior Director of IP Policy at Nokia, highlighted the complexities licensors face in aligning their strategies with differing legal standards in the United States, Germany, the UK and China. She emphasized the necessity for continuous legal monitoring to navigate these diverging frameworks effectively. From the implementer’s perspective, John Mulgrew, Former Vice President of IP at Lenovo, noted that jurisdictional inconsistencies significantly impact both litigation posture and negotiation strategy. He pointed out that companies must often weigh the procedural landscape and risk of injunctive relief when selecting a venue, a reality that has led to an increase in forum shopping. Courts in jurisdictions like Germany and Brazil were cited as increasingly favourable for SEP holders. The conversation then turned to how courts are shaping the assessment of SEP portfolio strength, essentiality, and license comparability. Patricio Delgado, Vice President of IPR Policy at Ericsson, explained how licensors are preparing for legal scrutiny by ensuring detailed essentiality assessments and maintaining documentation that supports the comparability of licenses. He stressed that a consistent approach across all his SEP license negotiations will ensure a FRAND outcome. Tom Brown, Senior Managing Legal Director at Dell, responded from the licensee’s standpoint, stressing the need for greater transparency and methodological clarity from SEP holders to ensure fair and objective portfolio evaluations. He wondered: Why are these comparable license agreements not public and accessible on the Internet? The panel discussed whether courts possess the necessary expertise to evaluate SEP portfolios comprehensively. While acknowledging that judicial understanding of SEP issues has improved, the idea was discussed that expert bodies or arbitration panels may be better positioned to conduct the deep technical and economic analyses required – however the big concern with arbitration is that it is not public. John Mulgrew, Former Vice President of IP at Lenovo understands that evidence disclosed in arbitration will need to be kept secret, but why not publish the outcome? This evolving legal landscape underscores the critical need for greater clarity, consistency, and expertise in the global administration of FRAND obligations. The session next turned to the critical role of data in SEP licensing and enforcement, as well as the evolution of licensing models across emerging technologies and industries. Panelists discussed how data limitations continue to pose a major challenge for both licensors and implementers in accurately evaluating SEP portfolios and negotiating licenses. From the implementer’s perspective, Tom Brown, Senior Managing Legal Director at Dell, and John Mulgrew, Former Vice President of IP at Lenovo, highlighted how data gaps—such as missing claim charts, vague declarations, and limited transparency around license terms—impede their ability to assess risk and engage in informed negotiations. He noted that the lack of accessible and reliable data on essentiality and licensing comparables often creates asymmetries in licensing discussions. The LexisNexis “Cellular Verified” initiative, in collaboration with over 30 ETSI-declaring companies, was spotlighted as a benchmark effort to clean, harmonize, and verify global SEP datasets. Tim Pohlmann, Managing Director Americas at LexisNexis, emphasized how this initiative is foundational to delivering reliable analytics and avoiding skewed rankings in legal and licensing contexts. This initiative addresses persistent problems of incomplete, duplicate, or biased declaration data, enabling more accurate litigation, licensing, and policy decisions. The panel broadly agreed that improving the availability of data would significantly enhance both the efficiency and balance of the SEP licensing environment.