Open Access
CDS position statement on the UK Intellectual Property Office's consultation on standard essential patents
Loading...
Files
RSC_WP_2025_42.pdf (495.61 KB)
Full-text in Open Access
License
Attribution 4.0 International
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
1028-3625
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Citation
EUI; RSC; Working Paper; 2025/42; Centre for a Digital Society
Cite
GALLI, Niccolò, BOTTA, Marco, CARLINI, Roberta, DA COSTA LEITE BORGES, Danielle, MARCUS, J. Scott, MAZZONI, Leonardo, MENÉNDEZ GONZÁLEZ, Natalia, PARCU, Pier Luigi, PISARKIEWICZ, Anna Renata, ROSSI, Maria Alessandra, CDS position statement on the UK Intellectual Property Office’s consultation on standard essential patents, EUI, RSC, Working Paper, 2025/42, Centre for a Digital Society - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/93723
Abstract
On 15 July 2025 the UK Intellectual Property Office opened a consultation on measures to improve transparency and dispute resolution in the SEP ecosystem. The Centre for a Digital Society (CDS) welcomes the IPO’s consultative approach and offers an evidence-based response grounded in interdisciplinary research. CDS cautions that interventions must avoid fragmenting international technology markets or imposing disproportionate compliance burdens; soft-law guidance and narrowly targeted, issue-specific regulation are preferable to broad, prescriptive regimes. Of the measures under review, the proposed Rate Determination Track (RDT) raises the greatest concern: although portfolio-wide FRAND determinations may appear efficient in principle, practical obstacles (parallel foreign litigation, contested validity/essentiality, appeal risks and potential competition-law exposure) mean the RDT’s benefits are uncertain unless its scope, standing and territorial effect are tightly constrained. By contrast, proportionate measures—enhancing the patent register with reciprocal, limited disclosures and adopting a SEP-specific pre-action protocol modelled on the CJEU’s Huawei v ZTE negotiation framework, are promising: they can reduce information asymmetries, encourage negotiated settlement, and preserve procedural fairness if coupled with robust confidentiality and proportionality safeguards. CDS recommends prioritising balanced transparency, reciprocal obligations, and international coordination while keeping regulatory intervention minimal and targeted.