標準必要專利與反托拉斯之成果運用法制──以高通案為例

Standard Essential Patents and Antitrust Law - The Case of Qualcomm

標準必要專利，為專利權人向標準必要專利組織，為公平、合理、無歧視的授權承諾（FRAND），以換取成為市場標準的獨占利益。一旦成為標準必要專利權人，市場力量將擴大，若同時搭配獨特商業模式的運作，恐引發違反反托拉斯規則之疑慮。然而，標準必要專利實係代表著智慧財產權的激勵與創新，與反托拉斯法促進自由競爭思想間呈現矛盾與合作的關聯，該如何維持兩者間的動態平衡，在不過度干預研發創新與成果運用產出下，仍保持市場競爭秩序，追求全體消費者的最大利益，是本文聚焦的重要議題。以近年來受到各國競爭主管機關與我國公平會關注的高通案為例，高通在行動通訊產業擁有大量標準必要專利外，搭配拒絕授權競爭對手、沒授權沒晶片政策、排他性獨家交易的三大商業模式，對於行動通訊市場構成強大的影響力，各國接連以違反競爭法為由處以高額裁罰。另一方面，高通積極爭取成為5G技術標準，搶占未來新興科技的關鍵核心，面對5G時代的到來，我國亦無法置身事外，本次公平會重罰高通234億元，對我國與高通的5G合作及產業競爭政策的可能影響與突破，應被加強關注。本文從高通案出發，分析各國競爭主管機關決定的思考脈絡，整理歸納出不同觀點，尋求產業創新與競爭規則的最佳平衡點，探究未來我國產業競爭政策與成果運用法制的最佳方展走向。 The antitrust law implications of standard essential patents (SEPs) and the commitments given by SEP holders to standard-setting organizations (SSOs) to license their SEPs on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms is an area that continues to be of considerable controversy worldwide. SEP and FRAND issues involve high-technology enterprises, whose businesses span the globe. For the example of Qualcomm, major competition agencies throughout the world, like the National Development and Reform Commission of the People's Republic of China (NDRC) , the South Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC), U.S.A Federal Trade Commission (FTC), European Commission Competition , had given their idea of the intellectual property rights (IPR) and the antitrust law. Taiwan's Federal Trade Commission (TFTC) had also announced that it will fine Qualcomm NT＄23.4 billion for violating antitrust law in the mobile communication standard baseband chip market. Qualcomm used its patents, which are SEP for CDMA, WCDMA, and LTE mobile technologies, to force rivals to agree to various contractual clauses that had the effect of driving up prices and maintaining its dominance in the Taiwan cell phone market. This article sets out the case for Qualcomm under the competition rules and explores the benchmarks that can be used for the standard. It is widely acknowledged that intellectual property rights are crucial to promoting innovation. But competition law plays a huge role by ensuring that such rights and monopoly is restricted in the market. Therefore, how to make balance between the intellectual property rights and competition law would be the important Study.