Governance of Intellectual Property Rights in China and Europe
Show Less

Governance of Intellectual Property Rights in China and Europe

Edited by Nari Lee, Niklas Bruun and Mingde Li

Intellectual property law performs a number of complex functions in society. To foster innovation and creativity in a society, governments are actively using intellectual property law as a means of governance. Both in China and in Europe, intellectual property law is used to further innovation and cultural policies to increase national competitiveness in a global economy. Due to its impact on global trade, intellectual property laws are increasingly made and influenced by international norms. Against the backdrop of this dynamic global intellectual property norm competition and interaction, this book explores governance of intellectual property rights in China and Europe. This book examines and compares the series of intellectual property law and system reforms in China and Europe. Through the analysis, this book argues that a successful governance of intellectual property rights require not only the adoption of a set of norms but also transformation of the perspectives and the implementing institutions.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 14: European standards in Chinese courts – a case of SEP and FRAND disputes in China

Yang Li and Nari Lee


Following the initial grant of a patent, the subsequent conclusion of contracts and acceptance of industry-specific customs and standards are adopted voluntarily by the relevant market participants. These agreements and practices are often a result of self-regulation by market participants. The activities of standard-setting organizations (SSOs), organisations that set standards for the use of standard essential patents (SEPs), are one such example of self-regulation. While patent rights are local, SSOs are often organizations consisting of multiple and heterogeneous participants. The guidelines, and other soft law policies, that SSOs voluntarily adopt are often likely to reflect the multi-territorial nature of the SSOs’ participants. When a dispute arises on the conditions set by SSOs over the assertion of SEPs, the problem is likely to include factual considerations that arise across various territories. As such, disputes surrounding SEPs force local courts to consider, not only local judicial standards and doctrines, but also those used elsewhere that may be relevant to understanding the complex facts of disputes. This chapter discusses how the Chinese courts interpret ‘fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory’ (FRAND) terms adopted by a European SSO; namely, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) The chapter explores in detail the dispute surrounding SEPs between Huawei and InterDigital in China, and analyses it in the context of similar cases surrounding SEPs and FRAND elsewhere. We argue that there seems to be a judicial globalization, whereby courts use foreign-developed principles in judging local disputes that have global commercial impacts. This is a result of the self-regulation of SSOs, and the Chinese court cases must be understood in the same vein. We conclude by arguing that this may be a next phase in the development of Chinese IP law, where local practices of governance have to be built after the initial norms have been transplant.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.