標準必要專利許可糾紛的管轄爭端及策略選擇

Jurisdictional Conflict and Strategy Selection of Standard Essential Patent Licensing Disputes

在標準必要專利許可糾紛中，為維護本國的司法主權及經濟利益，各國法院都傾向於主張對標準必要專利全球許可條件的管轄權，並頒發禁訴令，從而阻礙當事人在他國法院的平行訴訟，造成各國管轄權衝突。歐盟為此向WTO起訴我國法院頒發禁訴令的行為，其背後是對經濟利益以及國際話語權的爭奪。在博弈論視角下，國家之間互相簽發禁訴令、爭奪裁決權是不可避免的。現有的糾紛解決途徑因缺乏強制力無法消弭各國的管轄權爭端。對此，我國應維持頒發禁訴令的態度，以避免被剝奪話語權；同時發展國內標準必要專利許可的反壟斷調查，打擊不合理的專利許可要求；最後，推動建立具有強制力的國際合作機制，爭取早日與各國就標準必要專利許可糾紛的管轄問題達成共識。

In standard essential patent (SEP) licensing disputes, in order to protect the judicial sovereignty and economic interests of the country, national courts tend to assert their jurisdiction over the global licensing terms of SEPs and issue anti-suit injunctions (ASIs) to prevent the parties from bringing parallel litigation in foreign courts, leading to jurisdictional conflicts between countries. Due to the rivalry for control of the discourse on global technical standards, the European Union accuses China of violating WTO rules by issuing ASIs. According to game theory, competition between nations for the power to make choices and the issuance of ASIs are inevitable. Existing dispute resolution mechanisms cannot resolve the jurisdictional disputes due to the lack of coercive force. In this regard, China should maintain the attitude of issuing anti-suit injunction to avoid being deprived of the right to speak; meanwhile, it should develop its domestic antitrust investigation to combat unreasonable patent licensing requests; eventually, it should promote an international cooperation mechanism with coercive force and strives to reach a consensus with other countries on the jurisdiction of standard-essential patent licensing disputes soon.