The concept of FRAND licensing has been widely debated for years. It is not an exaggeration to call the stream of scholarly papers a flood. And since 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union and many national courts have weighed in as well. Yet notwithstanding the apparent abundance of scholarly analyses and judicial precedent, both the theory and practice of SEP licensing remain a black box. This is due mainly to the fact that ‘economics’ and ‘law’ coexist in different universes. Economic analyses often focus on specific issues, mostly in technical and formal terms. Lawyers, however, often lack access to the closed world of economic models and econo-technical jargon. The courts literally crave a set of accessible and practical guidelines for resolving FRAND disputes. This paper provides an overview of the most pressing practical issues of SEP licensing and offers a roadmap for the practical implementation of economic wisdom. Unlike most of the economic literature, it seeks to provide a more comprehensive and structured (and, hence, more workable) guide to the resolution of practical disputes.
2. Also of possible interest is Mathews P. George's SpicyIP post titled Sisvel v Haier: SEP Case Law from Germany, which summarizes the highlights of this recent BGH decision. For previous discussion on this blog, see here, here, and here.
3. Zheng (Sophia) Teng published Anti-Suit Injunction Issued in China: Comity, Pragmatism and Rule of Law on Conflicts.net. The article discusses two recent Chinese decisions granting anti-suit injunctions relating to litigation in Germany and India. For previous (brief) reference to one of them on this blog, see here. Hat tip to Matt Bultman for bringing this to my attention.