Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JULY 2024

Validating That Royalties Inferred From "Comparable" SEP Licences Are FRAND

When courts or arbitrators determine the fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalty for a disputed standard essential patent (SEP) licence, they often prefer to do so informed by "comparable contracts" – that is, the prices that parties agreed for similar licences in similar situations.

United KingdomIntellectual Property

When courts or arbitrators determine the fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalty for a disputed standard essential patent (SEP) licence, they often prefer to do so informed by "comparable contracts" – that is, the prices that parties agreed for similar licences in similar situations. Pekka Sääskilahti and Andrew Tuffin 1 explore how inference based on comparable contracts can be improved by using a "cross-check" – comparing the price proposed for the licence with the benefits it provides. They also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the most commonly used cross-checks.

Introduction

When courts or arbitrators are asked to determine the fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalty for a disputed standard essential patent (SEP) licence, often they prefer to do so informed by the terms and conditions agreed in "comparable contracts" – that is, the prices that similar parties agreed for similar licences in similar situations.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from