Home > English > Judicial Cases > Full Text
Hits Focused   English 中文
Copy Full Text Download Favorite Operation
  • Format:
  • View:

GuangDong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd., et al. v. Sharp Corporation., et al. (case regarding dispute over objection to jurisdiction of standard-essential patent license)

***等与***等标准必要专利许可纠纷管辖权异议纠纷案

尊敬的用户,您好!本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务,如需整篇翻译,请发邮件至info@chinalawinfo.com,或致电86 (10) 8268-9699进行咨询。

Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at: + 86 (10) 8268-9699 info@chinalawinfo.com

  • GuangDong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd., et al. v. Sharp Corporation. et al. (case regarding dispute over objection to jurisdiction of standard-essential patent license)
  • ***等与***等标准必要专利许可纠纷管辖权异议纠纷案
  • [Judgment Abstract]
  • [裁判摘要]
  • First, in determining the jurisdiction of a dispute over global licensing conditions for standard-essential patents (SEP), people's courts can take into consideration several elements such as the willingness of the parties in their negotiation of the involved SEP licensing, the nations licensed and the distribution of the SEP involved in the negotiation of licensing, major places where the involved SEP can be used by the implementer, the principal place of business or major revenue sources, or the place of negotiation for licensing, and the place where the party's property is seizable or enforceable.
  • 一、在确定标准必要专利全球许可条件纠纷的管辖时,可以考虑当事人就涉案标准必要专利许可磋商时的意愿范围,许可磋商所涉及的标准必要专利权利授予国及分布比例,涉案标准必要专利实施者的主要实施地、主要营业地或者主要营收来源地、许可磋商地,当事人可供扣押或可供执行财产所在地等。
  • Second, provided that the parties are willing to pursue a global licensing and the dispute between them has a deeper connection with China, a Chinese people's court may, upon the application of one of the parties, render an award on the global licensing conditions for the SEP, even if the parties fail to reach consent on jurisdiction.
  • 二、在当事人具备达成全球许可的意愿且纠纷与中国具有更密切联系时,即便当事人未达成管辖合意,中国法院仍有权依一方当事人的申请,对标准必要专利全球许可条件作出裁决。
  • Full-text Omitted.
  • 最高人民法院民事裁定书(2020)最高法知民辖终517号上诉人(原审被告):*** (Sharp Corporation)。住所地:日本国大阪府堺市堺区匠町1番地。
  • 代表人:野村胜明,该株式会社执行副总裁、董事。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:刘庆辉,北京安杰律师事务所律师。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:吴立,北京安杰律师事务所律师。
  • 上诉人(原审被告):***(Japan Corporation)。住所地:日本国大阪市阿倍野区西田边町1丁目19-20号。
  • 代表人:高原直幸,该株式会社法律部部长。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:陈志兴,北京安杰律师事务所律师。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:徐静,北京市金杜律师事务所律师。
  • 被上诉人(原审原告):***。住所地:中华人民共和国广东省东莞市长安镇乌沙海滨路18号。
  • 法定代表人:刘波,该公司经理兼执行董事。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:赵烨,北京市竞天公诚律师事务所律师。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:余媛芳。
  • 被上诉人(原审原告):***深圳分公司。住所地:中华人民共和国广东省深圳市南山区粤海街道海德三道126号卓越后海金融中心7层。
  • 法定代表人:刘波,该公司负责人。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:黄宇峰。
  • 委托诉讼代理人:王欢。
  • 上诉人***、***因与被上诉人***(以下简称OPPO公司)、***深圳分公司(以下简称OPPO深圳公司)标准必要专利许可纠纷管辖权异议一案,不服中华人民共和国广东省深圳市中级人民法院(以下简称原审法院)于2020年10月16日作出的(2020)粤03民初689号民事裁定(以下简称原审裁定),向本院提起上诉。本院于2020年12月7日立案后,依法组成合议庭,并于2021年1月14日询问当事人,***的委托诉讼代理人刘庆辉、吴立,***的委托诉讼代理人陈志兴、徐静,OPPO公司的委托诉讼代理人赵烨、余媛芳,OPPO深圳公司的委托诉讼代理人黄宇峰、王欢均到庭参加询问。
  • ***上诉请求:1.撤销原审裁定,驳回OPPO公司、OPPO深圳公司的起诉;2.如以上请求不能全部满足,则依法裁定驳回OPPO公司、OPPO深圳公司关于侵权损害赔偿、裁决WiFi标准相关标准必要专利全球许可条件及裁决3G标准、4G标准相关标准必要专利在中国大陆范围外的许可条件的起诉;3.裁定将涉及3G标准、4C标准相关标准必要专利在中国大陆范围的许可条件纠纷移送中华人民共和国广州知识产权法院(以下简称广州知识产权法院)管辖。事实与理由:
  • 第一,OPPO公司指控的侵权行为实施地、结果发生地或被告住所地均不在中国大陆,故OPPO公司就该侵权纠纷提起的诉讼不属于中国法院管辖的范围,应予驳回。本案涉及侵权和标准必要专利许可, OPPO公司将两个法律关系合并请求法院审理,没有法律依据。就标准必要专利许可纠纷而言,应当由被告住所地或合同履行地法院管辖,鉴于当事人尚未就本案合同的关键条款达成一致,尚不涉及合同的履行,而且被告住所地也不在中国大陆;就侵权纠纷而言,应当由侵权行为实施地、侵权结果发生地或者被告住所地法院管辖,上述地点均在域外。因此,OPPO公司在中国法院提起诉讼没有法律依据。
© Pkulaw (www.pkulaw.com) provides various professional solutions in such fields as legal information, law knowledge and legal software. Pkulaw provides you with abundant reference materials. When you invoke articles of laws and regulations, please check them with the standard texts.
You are welcome to view all our products and services. Pkulaw Express:How to quickly find information you need? What are the new features of Pkulaw V6?

Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile

智能检索

Welcome to V6

We will provide better legal search services for you

Back to V5 Still in V6

Expiration Reminder

Your partial permission to access Pkulaw.com expired on May 31, 2022.Upon expiry your account can still be used, but some access will be limited.

You can renew your subscription now by clicking the button below.Pkulaw.com welcomes you to participate in our Mid-Year Lucky Draw to win up to 10,000-yuan gift when you buy 3,600 yuan or more.

Ok Renew

Expiration Reminder

Your partial permission to access Pkulaw.com expires on May 31, 2022. Upon expiry your account can still be used, but some access will be limited.

You can renew your subscription now by clicking the button below. Pkulaw.com welcomes you to participate in our Mid-Year Lucky Draw to win up to 10,000-yuan gift when you buy 3,600 yuan or more.

Ok Renew