• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
Flyy Tech
  • Home
  • Apple
  • Applications
    • Computers
    • Laptop
    • Microsoft
  • Security
  • Smartphone
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
    • Literature
    • Cooking
    • Fitness
    • lifestyle
    • Music
    • Nature
    • Podcasts
    • Travel
    • Vlogs
  • Camera
  • Audio
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Apple
  • Applications
    • Computers
    • Laptop
    • Microsoft
  • Security
  • Smartphone
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
    • Literature
    • Cooking
    • Fitness
    • lifestyle
    • Music
    • Nature
    • Podcasts
    • Travel
    • Vlogs
  • Camera
  • Audio
No Result
View All Result
Flyy Tech
No Result
View All Result

Patent Experts Urge Kanter to Reject Calls to Scrap Avanci Business Review Letter

flyytech by flyytech
December 1, 2022
Home Review
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


“The authors of the November 30 letter argue that the October 17 letter ‘perpetuates long-standing misunderstandings by some academics, policy activists, and companies, who continue to assert that one-sided ‘patent holdup’ is endemic in high-tech industries.’”

business review letterA group of 25 experts in intellectual property law sent a letter to Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Jonathan Kanter today in support of a business review letter that the group said, “represented a legally sound and evidence-based approach in applying antitrust law to innovative commercial institutions.”

The letter is also a response to an earlier letter sent to Kanter on October 17, 2022, by 28 former government enforcement officials, professors, and public interest advocates that urged the AAG to reconsider the business review letter.

The Avanci business review letter was published by the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice on July 28, 2020. In the letter, the DOJ said that Avanci’s licensing platform, which plans to license patent claims declared essential to implement 5G in cars, did not harm competition in the industry. Business review letters represent guidance by the DOJ to inform businesses how to best coordinate their practices to ensure they don’t violate antitrust laws.

The authors of the November 30 letter argue that the October 17 letter “perpetuates long-standing misunderstandings by some academics, policy activists, and companies, who continue to assert that one-sided ‘patent holdup’ is endemic in high-tech industries.”

The October 17 letter said the DOJ’s decision created incentives for the patent pool and “patent trolls… to act in lockstep to the detriment of automobile manufacturers, component suppliers, and American consumers.”

November 30 Letter

Twenty-five former judges, government officials, legal academics, and economists signed the November 30 letter in support of the DOJ’s 2020 business review letter.

One of the primary motivations for the letter was to respond to the October 17 letter sent to Kanter. The authors of the November 30 letter argued the October 17 letter invoked the “patent troll epithet to disparage virtually all entities that engage in patent licensing and related monetization transactions.”

They added that the “patent troll” claim is not based on empirical evidence and the authors of the October 17 letter mischaracterized multiple court decisions, suggesting that the outcomes of these cases were the result of “holdup tactics by so-called ‘patent trolls,’” when in fact, “[t]he reality is precisely the opposite.”

Instead, said the November 30 letter, the courts in the cases used as examples in the October 17 letter issued injunctive relief because implementers were found to be unwilling licensees engaging in holdout tactics, “wrongly delaying negotiations or outright refusing to enter into licenses that would authorize their past and continuing use of the SEP owner’s valid patents.”

The November 30 signatories also took issue with the October 17 letter’s use of “decades-old theories and models that falsely predicted stymied innovation, higher prices, and consumer harm in the mobile telecommunications.”

The theories in question are “patent holdup” and “royalty stacking,” in particular. The November 30 letter cites research “that casts great doubt on the factual reliability of these theories.”

Rather than being held back by high royalty rates, the authors of the November 30 letter cite research that “consistently estimated that manufacturers have paid an aggregate royalty in the single digits.”

The November 30 letter instead supports the principle of “good-faith negotiations of licensing terms based on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalty rates,” which the authors argue supports a “thriving ecosystem in wireless technologies.”

The letter was signed by a number of well-known IP experts, advocates, judges, former government officials, economists, and law professors, including Alden Abbott, Former General Counsel at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission; Paul Michel, Chief Judge (Retired) of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC); Kathleen M. O’Malley, Circuit Judge (Retired) on the CAFC; Ronald A. Cass, Former Vice-Chairman and Commissioner at the United States International Trade Commission; Douglas H. Ginsburg, Senior Circuit Judge and Former Chief Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; Damon C. Matteo, Former Chairperson of the Patent Public Advisory Committee at the United States Patent & Trademark Office; Richard A. Epstein, Professor of Law at New York University School of Law; Kristen Osenga, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs & Professor of Law at the University of Richmond; Stephen Haber, Professor at Stanford University; and David J. Teece, Professor of Business Administration & Chair in Global Business at the University of California at Berkeley, among others.

October 17 Letter

The 28 signatories to the October 17 letter said that the DOJ’s 2020 letter needs to be reconsidered because it “threatens even more foreboding future harms as 5G is more fully deployed.”

They argued the DOJ letter undermines a bipartisan legal and economic consensus that abusive SEP practices can “harm innovation, competition, and consumers.”

Furthermore, the signatories claimed the DOJ relied on “questionable positions,” including a failure to consider how Avanci’s refusal to license suppliers violates FRAND terms.

Finally, the October 17 letter cited real-world events as corroboration for their concerns about the DOJ’s letter. They argued that Avanci’s existing 2G/3G/4G patent pool “has already resulted in harm to competition and consumers.”

The authors cited multiple lawsuits filed by Avanci members in the United States, Germany, and Japan against car manufacturers. They argued the DOJ’s assumptions have “force[d] companies to take their products off the market—and risk going out of business—long before any invalidity (or infringement) determinations are made.”

The October 17 letter was signed by representatives of a number of public interest and vocally anti-patent organizations, including Alex H. Moss of the Public Interest Patent Law Institute; Professor Michael A. Carrier of Rutgers Law School; John Bergmayer of Public Knowledge; Charles Duan, Senior Policy Fellow at the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property & American University Washington College of Law; Mitch Stoltz of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Where’s the Evidence?

Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law at George Mason University, who co-authored today’s letter with Jonathan Barnett, Professor of Law at the University of Southern California, told IPWatchdog that the assertions made in the October 17 letter about the harms to competition that have already materialized as a result of the Avanci pool are patently false and unsupported by economic evidence. Mossoff explained:

“The October 17 letter makes bald-faced assertions – backed by quotes from blogs and op-eds calling SEP owners ‘patent trolls’ – that consumers and competition have been harmed from allegedly supra-optimal royalties charged for the new mobile telecommunications services and capabilities that have been added to our connected cars. The letter cites no economic evidence or studies to support these arguments, because it cannot. There aren’t any. These are not evidence-backed arguments, just as there are no empirical or economic studies confirming ‘patent holdup’ or ‘royalty stacking’ theories. The October 17 letter simply restates again these same decades-old theories in a new commercial context – apparently engaging in the old propaganda tactic that dint of repetition will make something true.”

 

Image Source: Deposit Photos
Image ID: 36317893
Author: razihusin



Source_link

flyytech

flyytech

Next Post
U.S. Sanctions Against China Will Impact Taiwan, So Will CHIPS Act: Official

U.S. Sanctions Against China Will Impact Taiwan, So Will CHIPS Act: Official

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recommended.

Asus C423NA Chromebook Review – A 2021 Deep Dive

Asus C423NA Chromebook Review – A 2021 Deep Dive

September 17, 2022
When you chop someone out of a photo, but there they are anyway… – Naked Security

When you chop someone out of a photo, but there they are anyway… – Naked Security

March 23, 2023

Trending.

Image Creator now live in select countries for Microsoft Bing and coming soon in Microsoft Edge

Image Creator now live in select countries for Microsoft Bing and coming soon in Microsoft Edge

October 23, 2022
Review: Zoom ZPC-1

Review: Zoom ZPC-1

January 28, 2023
Allen Parr’s false teaching examined. Why you should unfollow him.

Allen Parr’s false teaching examined. Why you should unfollow him.

September 24, 2022
Elden Ring best spells 1.08: Tier lists, sorceries, incantations, and locations

Elden Ring best spells 1.08: Tier lists, sorceries, incantations, and locations

January 14, 2023
How to View Ring Doorbell on a Roku TV

How to View Ring Doorbell on a Roku TV

December 20, 2022

Flyy Tech

Welcome to Flyy Tech The goal of Flyy Tech is to give you the absolute best news sources for any topic! Our topics are carefully curated and constantly updated as we know the web moves fast so we try to as well.

Follow Us

Categories

  • Apple
  • Applications
  • Audio
  • Camera
  • Computers
  • Cooking
  • Entertainment
  • Fitness
  • Gaming
  • Laptop
  • lifestyle
  • Literature
  • Microsoft
  • Music
  • Podcasts
  • Review
  • Security
  • Smartphone
  • Travel
  • Uncategorized
  • Vlogs

Site Links

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Recent News

Malicious ChatGPT Chrome Extension Hijacks Facebook Accounts

Malicious ChatGPT Chrome Extension Hijacks Facebook Accounts

March 26, 2023
DPA Offers New 2012 and 2015 Pencil Microphones for the Stage

DPA Offers New 2012 and 2015 Pencil Microphones for the Stage

March 26, 2023

Copyright © 2022 Flyytech.com | All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Apple
  • Applications
    • Computers
    • Laptop
    • Microsoft
  • Security
  • Smartphone
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
    • Literature
    • Cooking
    • Fitness
    • lifestyle
    • Music
    • Nature
    • Podcasts
    • Travel
    • Vlogs

Copyright © 2022 Flyytech.com | All Rights Reserved.

What Are Cookies
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
Cookie SettingsAccept All
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT