A controversial topic in the patent business right-now is that of standard-essential patents. These are patents which are deemed necessary to support internationally adopted standards and are thus required to be licensed under FRAND "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory" terms, in order for standards organisations to consider adopting a firm's technology into a new standard.
Two elements have sparked a new debate over these terms; the recent Samsung slaughter by Apple in US courts, where Samsung found itself unable to utilise its potentially more significant FRAND patents as a counter to Apple's claims of infringement and, the need to standardise 4G, something which the world would like to see, whilst patent-holding firms would like to hold onto their current licensing rights, in view of the legal defence they can offer.
The ITU (International Telecommunication Union), which sets many of our international telecoms standards, has taken it upon itself to host a round-table to discuss, with firms, the current state of standard-essential patents and to see if some form of resolution to the matters at-hand can be reached; the biggest challenge of which is to tighten the meaning behind the FRAND terminology, in an attempt to address its ambiguity and impact in legal ramblings.
The ITU itself is of the opinion that it would be tough to leave legal matters and those of injunctions "completely unchecked", though didn't specifically say which point-of-view it supported.
Day one of talks began under the scrutiny of the press, with companies quickly establishing a dividing line between those who wish to utilise patents and those who wish to protect their property. The ITU hopes that as closed discussions begin over the coming days, firms will open-up a little more. Here's hoping!
