Jay Jurata

In a decision of November 26, 2020 in a patent infringement case of Nokia Technologies Oy against Daimler AG, the Düsseldorf Regional Court (file number 4c O 17/19) referred several questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regarding the licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs) (...)

After withdrawing support from a 2013 policy statement on appropriate remedies for standard-essential patents subject to a commitment to license on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, along (...)

This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. In a highly unusual move, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division (DOJ) recently  led a statement of interest in the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s (...)

The extent to which competition law has shaped developments and understandings of standard-essential patents (SEPs) has increased substantially over the past fifteen years. When e-Competitions began publishing, there were very few cases and agency enforcement actions on the topic. The “Smartphone Wars” that played out in the early 2010s altered the landscape significantly and brought about numerous decisions applying competition law and competition law principles to SEPs in Europe, the United States, and Asia. Today, the exact contours of how competition law interacts with SEPs is one of the most hotly debated topics in legal literature. Indeed, a small but vocal minority question whether the issues that arise with respect to SEPs even trigger competition law at all.

This article has been nominated for the 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. “Between a Rock and a Hard Place” : Unwired Planet v. Huawei and the Dangerous Implications of Worldwide FRAND Licenses I. Introduction The United Kingdom High (...)