從高通案論標準必要專利與競爭法之交錯

A Study on the Application of Competition Rules to Standard Essential Patent –Taking the Qualcomm Case as an Example

黃郁孟(Yu-Meng Huang)

指導教授 ： 范建得

國立清華大學/科技管理學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2018年)

摘要

高通是全球手機晶片龍頭，掌控了全球晶片市場的主要命脈，手機市場對於各國經濟的貢獻亦不在話下，可想而知高通公司任何商業活動都會受到全球關注。除了高通在市場上的地位，高通案本身的特殊性，讓本案更具有一定的指標，高通案的幾項特點分別為：第一、高通不僅在晶片市場獨占，在專利授權市場亦具有獨占地位，高通挾其垂直獨占地位與手機商簽訂一連串不合理的授權契約，違反FRAND承諾，其商業模式在實務上實屬少見；第二、高通案所涉及之法理討論包括契約法、專利法及競爭法，三部法律之調和及適用，將是本案最棘手的難題；第三、各國對高通均作出重罰，然而，各國處理本案之認事論理上仍有些許差異，因此研讀各國判決亦為研究本案的核心之一。
高通在2017年被我國公平會處以天價之罰款，在實務及學說界均引起不少的討論，其中被廣為討論的問題之一即為FRAND承諾下合理權利金如何訂定，蓋基於標準必要專利與一般專利具有本質上的差異性，故制定標準必要專利之合理權利金應有不同的計算方式，因此，本文將介紹目前實務上FRAND承諾下合理權利金之訂定方式。此外，FRAND承諾如何適用於競爭法，亦為本文討論的重點之一。
本文最後將分析比較美國、韓國及中國對於本案的處理，討論其處理之異同，復與我國公平會之處分做比較，評析討論我國公平會處分是否有尚待改善之處，作為未來相關機關對於相似議題可以稍加修正之方向。

關鍵字

標準必要專利 ； 專利濫用原則 ； 高通 ； 公平合理無歧視原則 ； 競爭法

並列摘要

Qualcomm plays a critical role in the market for modem chips. Qualcomm is the leading supplier of modem chips worldwide, so its business model would cause significant impact on global economy. There are a few traits that make Qualcomm case more distinctive. First of all, Qualcomm was a leading developer and proponent of 2G-CDMA standards, and it also owns a few share of SEPs in 3G and 4G standard (upstream market). Besides, Qualcomm has monopoly power in modem chips market (downstream market). Qualcomm breached the FRAND commitment to manipulate its vertically monopolistic status. Second, Qualcomm case involves three laws, which are contract law, patent law and antitrust law respectively. Third, Qualcomm is fined for anti-competitive practices in several countries. Therefore, to thoroughly analyzing each judgement is important.
FRAND commitments take on an especially important meaning to the vertically integrated monopolistic enterprise that participates in the downstream market and dominates the market. How to establish FRAND royalty is one of the important parts of this paper. Particularly, the paper will discuss how to set up the royalty base that may be used for calculating the SEP royalties. Besides, whether the breach of FRAND commitment violating antitrust law is one of the significant part that will be discussed.
This paper will analyze and discuss the judgement of the U.S., Korea and the agreement of China. Through the comparison of the judgment and agreement of this case, the paper will thoroughly discuss the reasoning of each country. In conclusion, the paper will comment on the decision of Taiwan Fair Trade Commission.

並列關鍵字

Patent Misuse Doctrine、 ； Antitrust Law ； Standard Essential Patent (SEP) ； Qualcomm ； FRAND

參考文獻

壹、中文文獻

一、專書

1. 陳歆（2012），美國專利訴訟關鍵案例解讀，初版，台北：元照。

2. 黃銘傑（2006），競爭法與智慧財產法之交會，初版，台北：元照 。

3. 劉孔中（2015），解構智財法及其與競爭法的衝突與調和，一版，台北：新學林。