The Advocate General Whatelet holds that the fact that a company owns a standard-essential patent does not necessarily mean that it holds a dominant position (Huawei / ZTE)

Huawei vs. ZTE - The Advocate General Has Spoken* Background On April 5, 2013, the Landgericht Düsseldorf (a German regional court) referred a set of questions relating to injunctive relief over standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) to the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) in connection with a patent dispute between Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (“Huawei”) and ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH (collectively “ZTE”). This lawsuit was originally brought by Huawei in 2011, relating to an alleged infringement by ZTE of a patent owned by Huawei and declared to be essential in the LTE standard developed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”). On November 20, 2014, the Advocate General (“AG”) issued his Opinion on this matter, in which it was pointed out that the ECJ is called

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Authors

  • AnJie Law (Beijing)
  • AnJie Law (Beijing)

Quotation

Zhan Hao, Wan Jia, The Advocate General Whatelet holds that the fact that a company owns a standard-essential patent does not necessarily mean that it holds a dominant position (Huawei / ZTE), 20 November 2014, e-Competitions Telecom & Dominance, Art. N° 70594

Visites 352

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues