1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 從基頻晶片產業探討於標準必要專利FRAND授權制度中之應對之道—以Qualcomm受裁罰案為中心
A Study of the Way to Deal with the FRAND Licensing Terms of Standard Essential Patents from the Baseband Chips Industry—Focusing on Case of Qualcomm
作者 李雅婷
Lee, Ya-Ting
貢獻者 陳桂恒
Chan, Kwei-Hang
李雅婷
Lee, Ya-Ting
關鍵詞 標準必要專利
公平合理無歧視
拒絕授權
關鍵設施理論
誠信協商
合理權利金
SEP
FRAND
Refusal of license
Essential facilities doctrine
Good-faith negotiation
Reasonable loyalty
日期 2018
上傳時間 3-Sep-2018 16:01:57 (UTC+8)
摘要 　　隨著行動通訊技術革新，人類的生活方式產生前所未有的巨大變化，而行動通訊因具備兼容性之特質，為求相關技術之效率與普及，目前主流作法係藉由國際標準制定組織依據一定的組織規章制定行動通訊標準，並且為了防免標準必要專利權人濫用其市場支配地位而有害於創新與市場競爭，標準制定組織規定其應遵孚智慧財產政策以及FRAND授權承諾，惟FRAND授權制度因其定義未明等原因，在國際授權實務上產生諸多競爭法爭議。
　　故本研究係自專利與標準必要專利FRAND授權制度出發，研究美國、日本、歐盟、我國以及中國大陸相關之競爭法規範，再核心討論目前國際主流國家對高通案之處置情形，接著由標準必要專利授權所產生之競爭法重要爭議中選取標準必要專利權人拒絕授權、專利箝制以及合理授權金此三大議題，分析近年來國際主流見解，最終基於前述研究內容進行綜合討論，並對於台灣在基頻晶片產業現況與FRAND授權制度之中，提出可能的應對方案，期許能夠對於未來日趨多變之基頻晶片領域提供一些討論方向。
　　With the innovation of mobile communication technology, it has brought unprecedented changes to the lifestyle of human beings. Because of the compatibility of mobile communication, to the efficiency and popularity of related technologies, the mains tream is setting Standard of Essential Patents (SEPs) by Standard-setting Organization (SSO). And in order to prevent the SEP holders abuse of market dominance and being harmful to the innovation incentive and competition, the SEP holder must abide by the intellectual property policy and FRAND license terms of SSO. However, because of the ambiguous definition of FRAND, there are many disputes in competition law when licensing.
　　This research will starts from the patent and SEPs, FRAND terms, the relevant competition regulations of the United States, Japan, the European Union, Taiwan and China, and then focus on the current situation of the international mainstream countries in the Qualcomm case, then discuss three vital disputes of the competition law cause by SEP licensing—refusal of license, patent hold-up and good-faith negotiation, reasonable loyalty, and analyze the mainstream opinions internationally in the recent years. In the conclusion, there will be comprehensive discussions based on the contents mentioned above for Taiwan. In the current situation of the baseband chip industry and the FRAND licensing terms, a possible solution will be proposed to provide insights for the fast-changing future of baseband chips industry.
參考文獻 一、中文文獻
（一）書籍
1.陳敏，(2007)。行政法總論。台北：新學林。
2.王居尉，(2009)。行動通訊導論。台北：學貫。
3.黃銘傑，(2009)。競爭法與智慧財產權法之交會－相生與相剋之間。台北：元照。
4.楊智傑，(2014)。專利法。台北：新學林。
5.曾勝珍，(2015)。圖解智慧財產權。台北：五南圖書。
6.劉孔中，(2015)。解構智財法及其與競爭法的衝突與調和。台北：新學林。
7.洪德欽等，(2015)。歐盟法之基礎原則與實務發展(上)。台北：臺大出版中心。
8.周延鵬、張淑真、曾志偉、汪忠輝，(2015)。致富密碼：智慧財產運營及貨幣化。台北：天下雜誌。
9.曾恕銘，(2016)。無線通訊系統概論：行動通訊與網路。台北：台灣東華。
10.劉尚志、陳在方，(2017)。台灣科技產業美國專利訴訟30年之回顧。台北：元照。
11.劉尚志、李偉綺、呂柔慧，(2018)。專利評價與損害賠償。台北：元照。
（二）期刊論文
1.劉孔中、簡維克，(2009)。CD-R案之解析與評釋－以公平法與專利強制授權為重心。公平交易季刊，第17卷第1期。頁1-38。
2.林平，(2015)。標準必要專利FRAND許可的經濟分析與反壟斷啟示。財經問題研究，6，3-12。
3.楊宏暉，(2015)。標準關鍵專利之濫用與限制競爭。公平交易季刊，第23卷第4期，頁35-86。
4.陳皓芸，(2015)。標準必要專利權之行使、權利濫用與獨占地位濫用。公平交易季刊，第25卷第1期，頁81-130。
5.沈宗倫，(2017)。標準必要專利之法定授權與專利權濫用──以誠實信用原則為中心。政大法學評論，第149期，頁1-83。
6.楊智傑，(2018)。高通行動通訊標準必要專利授權與競爭法:大陸、南韓、歐盟、美國、臺灣裁罰案之比較。公平交易季刊，第26卷第2期，頁1-54。
7.盧憶，(2018)。通信技術標準下的專利許可爭議－以美國法為例。法治現代化研究，2018年第2期，頁159-172。
（三）碩博士學位論文
1.邱筱婷 (2011)。行動通訊產業軟硬體整合策略分析。國立政治大學商管專業學院碩士學位學程碩士學位論文。
2.李兆國 (2003)。標準制定組織及標準專利權之爭議。國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文。
（四）行政處分與法院判決
1.公平交易委員會公處字第095156號處分書。
2.公平交易委員會處分書公處字第106094號。
3.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會行政處罰決定書發改辦價監處罰〔2015〕1號。
4.智慧財產法院106年度民暫字第10號裁定。
（五）網際網路
1.中華人民共和國國家工商行政管理總局令，關於禁止濫用智慧財產權排除、限制競爭行為的規定，上網日期2018年5月21日。檢自：http://home.saic.gov.cn/fgs/zcfg/201507/t20150721_192800.html
2.中國國務院反壟斷委員會，關於濫用智慧財產權的反壟斷指南（徵求意見稿），上網日期2018年5月21日，檢自：http://images.mofcom.gov.cn/fldj/201703/20170323141351774.doc
3.中央銀行經濟研究處 (2018年2月)，中華民國國際收支平衡表季報，上網日期2018年5月21日，檢自：https://www.cbc.gov.tw/public/Attachment/822316242771.pdf
4.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會，國務院關於印發《中國製造 2025》的通知，上網日期2018年3月15日，檢自：http://iknow.stpi.narl.org.tw/Post/Files/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E5%9C%8B%E5%8B%99%E9%99%A2%E9%97%9C%E6%96%BC%E5%8D%B0%E7%99%BC%E3%80%8A%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E8%A3%BD%E9%80%A02025%E3%80%8B%E7%9A%84%E9%80%9A%E7%9F%A5.pdf
5.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會，國家發展改革委對高通公司壟斷行為責令整改並罰款60億元，上網日期2018年1月3日，檢自：http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xwzx/xwfb/201502/t20150210_663822.html
6.邱金蘭，高通裁罰案 經濟部槓公平會，聯合新聞網，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7240/2763275?from=crm4-referralnews_ch2artbottom
7.張建中，工研院證實高通暫停5G合作 影響評估中。中央通訊社，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：http://www.cna.com.tw/news/ait/201710250150-1.aspx
8.賴佩璇，經濟部批評公平會裁罰高通 科法學者：逾越行政權限，聯合新聞網，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7321/2782767
9.林菁樺 (20118/4/11)，經長︰與高通5G合作案 已恢復，自由時報，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/business/paper/1171676
10.黃珮君。林百里批高通案對產業不利 經長：將再約高通談，自由時報，上網日期2018年3月19日，檢自：http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/business/breakingnews/2253972
11.潘姿羽，金價罰鍰近在眼前，公平會：高通已陸續匯入台灣，經濟日報，上網日期2018年3月14日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7240/2909829
12.公平交易委員會新聞資料　(2017/10/11)。公平交易委員會，上網日期2018年月日，檢自：https://www.ftc.gov.tw/internet/main/doc/docDetail.aspx?uid=126&docid=15235.
13.張煌仁 (2015/9/22)，WiMAX業者：政府騙了我們，ETToday新聞雲，上網日期2018年5月14日，檢自：httｐs://www.ettoday.net/news/20150922/568432.htm
14.曲建仲 (2014/9/29)。你真的都搞懂了嗎？數位通訊新世代，科學月刊，上網日期2018年5月14日，檢自：http://scimonth.blogspot.tw/2014/09/blog-post_3.html
二、英文文獻
（一）專書
Steven Anderman and Ariel Ezrachi, (2011). Intellectual Property and Competition Law: New Frontiers. New York: Oxford University Press.
（二）期刊
1.Mark A. Lemley and David McGowan, (1998). Legal Implications of Network Economic Effects, 86 Cal. L. Rev. 479.
2.Mark A. Lemley, (2002). Intellectual Property Rights and Standard-Setting Organizations, 90 Cal. L. Rev. 1889..
3.John C. Jarosz & Michael J. Chapman, (2013). The hypothetical negotiation and reasonable royalty damages: the tail wagging the dog. Stanford Technology Law Review Volume 16, Number 3 Spring 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.analysisgroup.com/uploadedfiles/content/insights/publishing/stlr_hypothetical_negotiation_royalty_damages_jarosz_chapman.pdf
4.Mark A. Lemley and Carl Shapiro, (2013). A Simple Approach to Setting Reasonable Royalties for Standard-Essential Patents, 28 Berkeley Tech. L.J. Available at: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol28/iss2/2.
5.Jorge L. Contreras, (2018). The Global Standards Wars: Patent and Competition Disputes in North America, Europe and Asia.
（三）判決
1.Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970), modified sub nom. Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. U.S. Plywood-Champion Papers, Inc., 446 F.2d 295 (2d Cir. 1971)
2.MCI Commc`ns Corp. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 708 F.2d 1081 (7th Cir. 1983).
3.Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585, 105 S. Ct. 2847, 86 L. Ed. 2d 467 (1985).
4.MetroNet Servs. Corp. v. Qwest Corp., 383 F.3d 1124, 1131 (9th Cir. 2004).
5.Verizon Commc`ns Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398, 411, 124 S. Ct. 872, 881, 157 L. Ed. 2d 823 (2004).
6.Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 501 F.3d 297, 313 (3d Cir 2007).
7.Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007).
8.Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 617, 629, 128 S. Ct. 2109, 2117, 170 L. Ed. 2d 996 (2008).
9.Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009).
10.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 696 F.3d 872, 878 (9th Cir. 2012).
11.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., No. C10-1823JLR, 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 25, 2013).
12.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).
13.Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated,No. 17-CV-00220-LHK, at 5 (N.D. Cal, 2017).
14.In re Qualcomm Antitrust Litig., 292 F. Supp. 3d 948 (N.D. Cal. 2017).
15.Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 17-CV-00220-LHK, (N.D. Cal, 2017).
16.Impression Prod., Inc. v. Lexmark Int`l, Inc., 137 S. Ct. 1523, 1531, 198 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2017).
17.Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH., Case C-170/13, European Court of Justice.
18.Orange-Book-Standard, available at: http://www.ie-forum.nl/backoffice/uploads/file/IEForum/IEForum%20Uitspraken/Octrooirecht/EN%20Translation%20BGH%20Orange%20Book%20Standard%20-%20eng.pdf (last visited:2018/4/10).
19.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).
（四）報告或官方文件
1.European Commission, 19th IBA Competition Conference, Florence 11 September 2015 – version 01, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/vestager/announcements/intellectual-property-and-competition_en
2.Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003 . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A52006XC0901%2801%29.
3.Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act. Federal Trade Commission. https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/735201/150813section5enforcement.pdf.
4.Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen In the Matter of Qualcomm Inc. File No. 141-0199 (2017). https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/170117qualcomm_mko_dissenting_statement_17-1-17a.pdf
5.Strict Sanctions on Qualcomm`s Abuse of Cellular SEPs, Imposed the largest surcharge in the KFTC`s history - KRW 1 trillion 30 billion and the orders to rectify the unfair business model (2016/12/28). http://essentialpatentblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/64/2017/01/2016.12.28-KFTC-Press-Release-unofficial-Englsih-translation.pdf.
6.Antitrust: Commission opens two formal investigations against chipset supplier Qualcomm(2015/7/16), European Commission Press Release Database. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5383_en.htm
7.Antitrust: Commission fines Qualcomm €997 million for abuse of dominant market position (2018/1/24), European Commission Press Release Database http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-421_en.htm
8.IEEE 802 network enhancements for the next decade Industry Connections Activity Initiation Document (ICAID) Version: 1.3, 2017-03-16. IEEE Standards Association. http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/iccom/IC17-001-01_IE.pdf.
9.IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws. http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/sb_bylaws.pdf
10.Ex ante disclosure of licensing terms, ETSI. http://www.etsi.org/about/how-we-work/intellectual-property-rights-iprs/ex-ante-disclosures
11.ETSI Intellectual Property Rights Policy (2017)
12.Antitrust: Commission opens two formal investigations against chipset supplier Qualcomm (2015/7/16), European Commission Press Release Database, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5383_en.htm
13.Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property. U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. https://www.justice.gov/atr/IPguidelines/download
14.Factsheet - Standard Essential Patents. European Commission. Retrieved from: http://europa.eu/rapid/attachment/IP-17-4942/en/Factsheet%20-%20Standard%20Essential%20Patents.pdf.
15.Setting out the EU approach to Standard Essential Patents (2017/11/29). European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26583/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native.
16.Global cellular baseband processor revenue share by vendor from 2014 to 2016, Statistics. https://www.statista.com/statistics/427073/cellular-baseband-processor-supplier-share/
17.Sravan Kundojjala, Stuart Robinson, & Christopher Taylor (2018/1/8). Baseband Market Share Tracker Q3 2017: Qualcomm Gains Share. Strategy Analystics. https://www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/components/rf-and-wireless/reports/report-detail/baseband-market-share-tracker-q3-2017-qualcomm-gains-share#.WulgSohuY2x
18.Communication from the Commission to the Institutions on Setting out the EU approach to Standard Essential Patents. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26583
19.Antitrust: Commission opens proceedings against Samsung, European Commission. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-89_en.htm
20.Report by the EAGCP, An economic approach to Article 82, p8 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/competition/economist/eagcp_july_21_05.pdf
21.Karen Campbell, Jim Diffley, Bob Flanagan, Bill Morelli, Brendan O’Neil, Francis Sideco (2017.Jan.). The 5G Economy: How 5G technology will contribute to the global economy. IHS Economics & IHS Techonology Economic Impact Analysis. https://cdn.ihs.com/www/pdf/IHS-Technology-5G-Economic-Impact-Study.pdf.
（五）網際網路
1.About 3GPP, Retrieved Apri. 11 2018, from http://www.3gpp.org/about-3gpp
2.What are standards?, IEEE, Retrieved May 22, from: http://standards.ieee.org/develop/overview.html
3.About WSC, World Standards Cooperation, Retrieved May 22, from: https://www.worldstandardscooperation.org/about/
4.What are standards? ETSI, Retrieved May 22, from: http://www.etsi.org/standards/what-are-standards.
5.How are standards made? IEEE, Retrieved May 22, from: http://standards.ieee.org/develop/process.html.
6.How we develop standards, Retrieved May 22, from: https://www.iso.org/developing-standards.html
7.Qualcomm Report Segment, , Retrieved Apri 7 2018, from: http://investor.qualcomm.com/reportingsegments.cfm
8.Global cellular baseband processor revenue share by vendor from 2014 to 2016, , Retrieved Mar. 26 2018, from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/427073/cellular-baseband-processor-supplier-share/, statista
9.Qualcomm 2016 Annual Report of Form 10-K For the Fiscal Year Ended September 25, 2016, p10-13, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/QCOM/6180434255x0x915400/CD71F5A8-BEAA-4EEE-B385-2CD75B48B9D3/2016_Annual_Report_Form_10-K.pdf
10.Qualcomm Announces First Quarter Fiscal 2018 Results, Qualcomm, , Retrieved May 13 2018, from: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/QCOM/6180434255x0x970100/92139AD2-4BBB-4F30-8D4B-F5C867BFEA87/FY_2018_1st_Quarter_Earnings_Release.pdf
11.Mike Freeman (2018/4/27). Qualcomm tweaks patent licensing scheme; Will it help end legal war with Apple?, The San Diego Union Tribune, Retrieved May 23 2018, from:: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-qualcomm-framework-20180427-story.html
12.Qualcomm Comments on Apple Complaint (2017/1/20), Qualcomm Press Release, Retrieved June 23 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/01/20/qualcomm-comments-apple-complaint
13.Qualcomm Confirms Receipt of Korea Fair Trade Commission`s Case Examiner’s Report (2015/11/17). Qualcomm Press Announcements, , Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/11/17/qualcomm-confirms-receipt-korea-fair-trade-commissions-case-examiners
14.Qualcomm Responds to Announcement by Korea Fair Trade Commission (2016/12/27), Qualcomm Press Announcement, , Retrieved May 2 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2016/12/27/qualcomm-responds-announcement-korea-fair-trade-commission
15.Qualcomm Stay Appeal Denied by Seoul High Court on Absence of Irreparable Harm; Appeal to Seoul High Court on Merits of the Case to Proceed (2017/9/4), Qualcomm Press Announcement, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/09/04/qualcomm-stay-appeal-denied-seoul-high-court-absence-irreparable-har
16.Qualcomm Disagrees with Decision by Taiwan Fair Trade Commission and Intends to Seek a Stay and Appeal the Decision (2017/10/11), Qualcomm Press Announcements, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/10/11/qualcomm-disagrees-decision-taiwan-fair-trade-commission-and-intends-seek
17.NVIDIA to Wind Down Icera Modem Operations (2015/5/5), NVIDIA, Retrieved May 5 2018, from: https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-to-wind-down-icera-modem-operations
18.Roumeliotis, Liana B. Baker (2018/3/13). Broadcom to end bid for Qualcomm, keeps plan to move to U.S.: sources, Reuter, from : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qualcomm-m-a-broadcom/broadcom-to-end-bid-for-qualcomm-keeps-plan-to-move-to-u-s-sources-idUSKCN1GP1ND.
19.Antitrust: Commission sends two Statements of Objections on exclusivity payments and predatory pricing to Qualcomm(2015/12/8), European Commission Press Release Database, Retrieved Apri. 30, from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6271_en.htm
20.Case AT.40220 – Qualcomm (exclusivity payments) Commission Decision of 24/01/2018, from: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/40220/40220_2395_3.pdf.
21.Qualcomm to Appeal European Commission Decision Regarding Modem Chip Agreement (2018/1/24), Qualcomm Press Announcement, Retrieved May 5 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2018/01/24/qualcomm-appeal-european-commission-decision-regarding-modem-chip-agreement
22.Qualcomm to Enhance Development of Taiwan’s Wireless Ecosystem Through the Qualcomm Innovation Lab – Taiwan (2017/8/10), Qualcomm Press Announcements. Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/08/10/qualcomm-enhance-development-taiwans-wireless-ecosystem-through-qualcomm
23.Taiwan’s 5G Value Chain Expected to Output $134 billion and Support 510K jobs in 2035 (2017/8/10), Qualcomm Press Announcements, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/08/10/taiwans-5g-value-chain-expected-output-134-billion-and-support-510k-jobs
24.Gottfried Schüll, International report - The Dusseldorf World Patent Court?(2012/4/18), Retrieved Apri. 9 2018, from: 　 http://www.iam-media.com/reports/Detail.aspx?g=adfe3855-9a8f-4dd8-97a4-974716411f01
25.Dr. Stefan M. Zech, Jochen Kilchert, Dr. Stephan Held, Christian Hess, Tilman Pfrang and Dr. Tobias Wuttke, Patent enforcement through the courts in Germany(2018/2/19), Retrieved Apr. 9 2018, from: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b12d6f05-d05a-47fc-b7b0-e6c3dcfd1aaa
26.Aaron Tilley (2017/1/20). Apple Sues Qualcomm For $1 Billion, Alleging Extortion, Forbes, Retrieved Jun 7 2018, from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2017/01/20/apple-sues-qualcomm-for-1-billion-over-royalties/#1819729d41f5

三、日文文獻
（一）書籍
丸島儀一(2011)。知的財産戦略―技術で事業を強くするために。東京：ダイヤモンド社。
（二）報告與官方文件
1.不公正な取引方法に関する基本的考え力(昭和57年)，獨占禁止法研究會，6-7。
2.ICT 国際標準化推進ガイドライン(2008)。研究開発・標準化戦略委員会，日本総務省， http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/policyreports/joho_tsusin/kenkyu_kaihatsu/pdf/080606_1_sa7.pdf，14-16。
3.知的財産の利用に関する独占禁止法上の指針，(平成28年1月21日)。公正取引委員會。參見: http://www.jftc.go.jp/dk/guideline/unyoukijun/chitekizaisan.html。
（三）期刊
平山賢太郎 (2014)。独禁法から考える 知的財産権ライセンス拒絶．差止請求，13-14，パテント Vol.67 No.12。
（四）判決與行政處分
1.知財高裁平成25年（ネ）第10043号。
2.公正取引委員会平成21年排除措置命令書（措）第22号。
（五）網際網路
独占禁止法研究会の開催について(平成28年2月10日)，公正取引委員会，參見：https://www.jftc.go.jp/houdou/pressrelease/h28/feb/160210_3.html (最終瀏覽日：2018/8/19)。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
104364217
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104364217
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 陳桂恒zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chan, Kwei-Hangen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 李雅婷zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lee, Ya-Tingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 李雅婷zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Lee, Ya-Tingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2018en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Sep-2018 16:01:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Sep-2018 16:01:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Sep-2018 16:01:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0104364217en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119966-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 科技管理與智慧財產研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 104364217zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 　　隨著行動通訊技術革新，人類的生活方式產生前所未有的巨大變化，而行動通訊因具備兼容性之特質，為求相關技術之效率與普及，目前主流作法係藉由國際標準制定組織依據一定的組織規章制定行動通訊標準，並且為了防免標準必要專利權人濫用其市場支配地位而有害於創新與市場競爭，標準制定組織規定其應遵孚智慧財產政策以及FRAND授權承諾，惟FRAND授權制度因其定義未明等原因，在國際授權實務上產生諸多競爭法爭議。
　　故本研究係自專利與標準必要專利FRAND授權制度出發，研究美國、日本、歐盟、我國以及中國大陸相關之競爭法規範，再核心討論目前國際主流國家對高通案之處置情形，接著由標準必要專利授權所產生之競爭法重要爭議中選取標準必要專利權人拒絕授權、專利箝制以及合理授權金此三大議題，分析近年來國際主流見解，最終基於前述研究內容進行綜合討論，並對於台灣在基頻晶片產業現況與FRAND授權制度之中，提出可能的應對方案，期許能夠對於未來日趨多變之基頻晶片領域提供一些討論方向。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 　　With the innovation of mobile communication technology, it has brought unprecedented changes to the lifestyle of human beings. Because of the compatibility of mobile communication, to the efficiency and popularity of related technologies, the mains tream is setting Standard of Essential Patents (SEPs) by Standard-setting Organization (SSO). And in order to prevent the SEP holders abuse of market dominance and being harmful to the innovation incentive and competition, the SEP holder must abide by the intellectual property policy and FRAND license terms of SSO. However, because of the ambiguous definition of FRAND, there are many disputes in competition law when licensing.
　　This research will starts from the patent and SEPs, FRAND terms, the relevant competition regulations of the United States, Japan, the European Union, Taiwan and China, and then focus on the current situation of the international mainstream countries in the Qualcomm case, then discuss three vital disputes of the competition law cause by SEP licensing—refusal of license, patent hold-up and good-faith negotiation, reasonable loyalty, and analyze the mainstream opinions internationally in the recent years. In the conclusion, there will be comprehensive discussions based on the contents mentioned above for Taiwan. In the current situation of the baseband chip industry and the FRAND licensing terms, a possible solution will be proposed to provide insights for the fast-changing future of baseband chips industry.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章、緒論 1
第一節、研究動機 1
第二節、研究目的 7
第三節、研究範圍 8
第四節、研究方法與研究限制 8
第五節、研究架構 9
第二章　文獻探討 12
第一節　專利與專利授權 12
第一項、專利 12
第二項、專利授權 14
第二節　標準必要專利與FRAND授權制度 14
第一項、產業標準 14
第一款、產業標準之產生 14
第二款、產業標準之類型 17
第二項、標準制定組織、標準必要專利與FRAND授權制度 18
第一款、標準制定組織 19
第二款、標準必要專利 21
第三款、標準制定組織之智慧財產權政策與FRAND授權義務 22
第三項、專利授權與競爭法之關係 27
第三節　主要先進國家與FRAND授權相關之競爭法規範 28
第一項、美國 28
第二項、日本 30
第三項、歐盟 32
第四項、台灣 34
第五項、中國大陸 35
第四節　行動通訊產業與基頻晶片市場 38
第一項、前言 38
第二項、行動通訊產業概述 39
第三項、行動通訊標準演進過程 42
第四項、基頻晶片產業概況 47
第一款、基頻晶片產業簡介 47
第二款、高通公司概況 47
第三款、高通之基頻晶片商業模式與競爭態樣 51
第三章　高通公司基頻晶片裁罰案研究 56
第一節、前言 56
第二節、高通公司受裁罰案與國際耗盡原則 56
第三節、高通裁罰與訴訟案分析 58
第一項、2009年日本公平會處分案 58
第二項、2015年中國發改委裁罰案 59
第一款、案件背景 59
第二款、裁罰內容 60
第三款、後續發展 65
第三項、2016年南韓公平會裁罰案 65
第一款、案件背景 65
第二款、裁罰內容 67
第三款、後續發展 73
第四項、2017年美國聯邦貿易委員會對高通訴訟案 74
第一款、案件背景 74
第二款、裁決內容 75
第三款、後續發展 80
第五項、2017年台灣公平會裁罰案 80
第一款、案件背景 80
第二款、裁罰內容 80
第三款、後續發展 91
第六項、2018年歐盟執委會裁罰案 95
第一款、案件背景 95
第二款、裁罰內容 97
第三款、後續發展 99
第六項、小結 99
第四章　高通案所涉及之競爭法議題研究 104
第一節、標準必要專利與關鍵設施理論 104
第一項、標準必要專利授權與濫用市場獨占地位 104
第二項、標準必要專利之拒絕授權與關鍵設施理論 107
第二節、標準必要專利之競爭法議題－專利箝制與磋商程序 111
第一項、前言 111
第二項、目前實務上對於專利箝制所採見解-授權磋商之雙方義務 114
第三節、標準必要專利之競爭法議題－合理權利金與合理授權條件 117
第一項，前言 117
第二項、合理權利金 117
第一款、合理權利金之計算基礎（loyalty base） 117
第二款、合理權利金之授權比例（loyalty rate） 119
第三項、合理授權條件 122
第一款、綑綁授權 122
第二款、獨家折讓條款 123
第五章 綜合討論 125
第一節、從標準必要專利授權制度本身觀察 125
第二節、從標準必要專利授權制度所產生之競爭法議題觀察 126
第一項、標準必要專利授權制度之利益平衡 126
第一款、以標準必要專利權人立場觀之 126
第二款、以標準必要專利權潛在被授權人立場觀之 127
第三款、其他 128
第二項、標準必要專利授權制度之未來展望 128
第三節、台灣技術授權市場之現況 129
第四節、我國裁罰案之必要性與影響 130
第六章　結論與建議 132
第一節　結論 132
第二節　建議與未來展望 135
第一項、法規面之調整必要性 135
第二項、於標準制定生態中的生存策略 135
第三項、於國際主流標準必要專利授權與競爭法趨勢下之應對方案 136
參考文獻 138		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2455144 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104364217en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 標準必要專利zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公平合理無歧視zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 拒絕授權zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 關鍵設施理論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 誠信協商zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 合理權利金zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) SEPen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) FRANDen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Refusal of licenseen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Essential facilities doctrineen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Good-faith negotiationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Reasonable loyaltyen_US
dc.title (題名) 從基頻晶片產業探討於標準必要專利FRAND授權制度中之應對之道—以Qualcomm受裁罰案為中心zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A Study of the Way to Deal with the FRAND Licensing Terms of Standard Essential Patents from the Baseband Chips Industry—Focusing on Case of Qualcommen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻
（一）書籍
1.陳敏，(2007)。行政法總論。台北：新學林。
2.王居尉，(2009)。行動通訊導論。台北：學貫。
3.黃銘傑，(2009)。競爭法與智慧財產權法之交會－相生與相剋之間。台北：元照。
4.楊智傑，(2014)。專利法。台北：新學林。
5.曾勝珍，(2015)。圖解智慧財產權。台北：五南圖書。
6.劉孔中，(2015)。解構智財法及其與競爭法的衝突與調和。台北：新學林。
7.洪德欽等，(2015)。歐盟法之基礎原則與實務發展(上)。台北：臺大出版中心。
8.周延鵬、張淑真、曾志偉、汪忠輝，(2015)。致富密碼：智慧財產運營及貨幣化。台北：天下雜誌。
9.曾恕銘，(2016)。無線通訊系統概論：行動通訊與網路。台北：台灣東華。
10.劉尚志、陳在方，(2017)。台灣科技產業美國專利訴訟30年之回顧。台北：元照。
11.劉尚志、李偉綺、呂柔慧，(2018)。專利評價與損害賠償。台北：元照。
（二）期刊論文
1.劉孔中、簡維克，(2009)。CD-R案之解析與評釋－以公平法與專利強制授權為重心。公平交易季刊，第17卷第1期。頁1-38。
2.林平，(2015)。標準必要專利FRAND許可的經濟分析與反壟斷啟示。財經問題研究，6，3-12。
3.楊宏暉，(2015)。標準關鍵專利之濫用與限制競爭。公平交易季刊，第23卷第4期，頁35-86。
4.陳皓芸，(2015)。標準必要專利權之行使、權利濫用與獨占地位濫用。公平交易季刊，第25卷第1期，頁81-130。
5.沈宗倫，(2017)。標準必要專利之法定授權與專利權濫用──以誠實信用原則為中心。政大法學評論，第149期，頁1-83。
6.楊智傑，(2018)。高通行動通訊標準必要專利授權與競爭法:大陸、南韓、歐盟、美國、臺灣裁罰案之比較。公平交易季刊，第26卷第2期，頁1-54。
7.盧憶，(2018)。通信技術標準下的專利許可爭議－以美國法為例。法治現代化研究，2018年第2期，頁159-172。
（三）碩博士學位論文
1.邱筱婷 (2011)。行動通訊產業軟硬體整合策略分析。國立政治大學商管專業學院碩士學位學程碩士學位論文。
2.李兆國 (2003)。標準制定組織及標準專利權之爭議。國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文。
（四）行政處分與法院判決
1.公平交易委員會公處字第095156號處分書。
2.公平交易委員會處分書公處字第106094號。
3.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會行政處罰決定書發改辦價監處罰〔2015〕1號。
4.智慧財產法院106年度民暫字第10號裁定。
（五）網際網路
1.中華人民共和國國家工商行政管理總局令，關於禁止濫用智慧財產權排除、限制競爭行為的規定，上網日期2018年5月21日。檢自：http://home.saic.gov.cn/fgs/zcfg/201507/t20150721_192800.html
2.中國國務院反壟斷委員會，關於濫用智慧財產權的反壟斷指南（徵求意見稿），上網日期2018年5月21日，檢自：http://images.mofcom.gov.cn/fldj/201703/20170323141351774.doc
3.中央銀行經濟研究處 (2018年2月)，中華民國國際收支平衡表季報，上網日期2018年5月21日，檢自：https://www.cbc.gov.tw/public/Attachment/822316242771.pdf
4.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會，國務院關於印發《中國製造 2025》的通知，上網日期2018年3月15日，檢自：http://iknow.stpi.narl.org.tw/Post/Files/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E5%9C%8B%E5%8B%99%E9%99%A2%E9%97%9C%E6%96%BC%E5%8D%B0%E7%99%BC%E3%80%8A%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E8%A3%BD%E9%80%A02025%E3%80%8B%E7%9A%84%E9%80%9A%E7%9F%A5.pdf
5.中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會，國家發展改革委對高通公司壟斷行為責令整改並罰款60億元，上網日期2018年1月3日，檢自：http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xwzx/xwfb/201502/t20150210_663822.html
6.邱金蘭，高通裁罰案 經濟部槓公平會，聯合新聞網，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7240/2763275?from=crm4-referralnews_ch2artbottom
7.張建中，工研院證實高通暫停5G合作 影響評估中。中央通訊社，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：http://www.cna.com.tw/news/ait/201710250150-1.aspx
8.賴佩璇，經濟部批評公平會裁罰高通 科法學者：逾越行政權限，聯合新聞網，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7321/2782767
9.林菁樺 (20118/4/11)，經長︰與高通5G合作案 已恢復，自由時報，上網日期2018年4月11日，檢自：http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/business/paper/1171676
10.黃珮君。林百里批高通案對產業不利 經長：將再約高通談，自由時報，上網日期2018年3月19日，檢自：http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/business/breakingnews/2253972
11.潘姿羽，金價罰鍰近在眼前，公平會：高通已陸續匯入台灣，經濟日報，上網日期2018年3月14日，檢自：https://udn.com/news/story/7240/2909829
12.公平交易委員會新聞資料　(2017/10/11)。公平交易委員會，上網日期2018年月日，檢自：https://www.ftc.gov.tw/internet/main/doc/docDetail.aspx?uid=126&docid=15235.
13.張煌仁 (2015/9/22)，WiMAX業者：政府騙了我們，ETToday新聞雲，上網日期2018年5月14日，檢自：httｐs://www.ettoday.net/news/20150922/568432.htm
14.曲建仲 (2014/9/29)。你真的都搞懂了嗎？數位通訊新世代，科學月刊，上網日期2018年5月14日，檢自：http://scimonth.blogspot.tw/2014/09/blog-post_3.html
二、英文文獻
（一）專書
Steven Anderman and Ariel Ezrachi, (2011). Intellectual Property and Competition Law: New Frontiers. New York: Oxford University Press.
（二）期刊
1.Mark A. Lemley and David McGowan, (1998). Legal Implications of Network Economic Effects, 86 Cal. L. Rev. 479.
2.Mark A. Lemley, (2002). Intellectual Property Rights and Standard-Setting Organizations, 90 Cal. L. Rev. 1889..
3.John C. Jarosz & Michael J. Chapman, (2013). The hypothetical negotiation and reasonable royalty damages: the tail wagging the dog. Stanford Technology Law Review Volume 16, Number 3 Spring 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.analysisgroup.com/uploadedfiles/content/insights/publishing/stlr_hypothetical_negotiation_royalty_damages_jarosz_chapman.pdf
4.Mark A. Lemley and Carl Shapiro, (2013). A Simple Approach to Setting Reasonable Royalties for Standard-Essential Patents, 28 Berkeley Tech. L.J. Available at: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol28/iss2/2.
5.Jorge L. Contreras, (2018). The Global Standards Wars: Patent and Competition Disputes in North America, Europe and Asia.
（三）判決
1.Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970), modified sub nom. Georgia-Pac. Corp. v. U.S. Plywood-Champion Papers, Inc., 446 F.2d 295 (2d Cir. 1971)
2.MCI Commc`ns Corp. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 708 F.2d 1081 (7th Cir. 1983).
3.Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp., 472 U.S. 585, 105 S. Ct. 2847, 86 L. Ed. 2d 467 (1985).
4.MetroNet Servs. Corp. v. Qwest Corp., 383 F.3d 1124, 1131 (9th Cir. 2004).
5.Verizon Commc`ns Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398, 411, 124 S. Ct. 872, 881, 157 L. Ed. 2d 823 (2004).
6.Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 501 F.3d 297, 313 (3d Cir 2007).
7.Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007).
8.Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 617, 629, 128 S. Ct. 2109, 2117, 170 L. Ed. 2d 996 (2008).
9.Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009).
10.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 696 F.3d 872, 878 (9th Cir. 2012).
11.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., No. C10-1823JLR, 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 25, 2013).
12.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).
13.Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated,No. 17-CV-00220-LHK, at 5 (N.D. Cal, 2017).
14.In re Qualcomm Antitrust Litig., 292 F. Supp. 3d 948 (N.D. Cal. 2017).
15.Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 17-CV-00220-LHK, (N.D. Cal, 2017).
16.Impression Prod., Inc. v. Lexmark Int`l, Inc., 137 S. Ct. 1523, 1531, 198 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2017).
17.Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH., Case C-170/13, European Court of Justice.
18.Orange-Book-Standard, available at: http://www.ie-forum.nl/backoffice/uploads/file/IEForum/IEForum%20Uitspraken/Octrooirecht/EN%20Translation%20BGH%20Orange%20Book%20Standard%20-%20eng.pdf (last visited:2018/4/10).
19.Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).
（四）報告或官方文件
1.European Commission, 19th IBA Competition Conference, Florence 11 September 2015 – version 01, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/vestager/announcements/intellectual-property-and-competition_en
2.Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003 . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A52006XC0901%2801%29.
3.Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act. Federal Trade Commission. https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/735201/150813section5enforcement.pdf.
4.Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen In the Matter of Qualcomm Inc. File No. 141-0199 (2017). https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/170117qualcomm_mko_dissenting_statement_17-1-17a.pdf
5.Strict Sanctions on Qualcomm`s Abuse of Cellular SEPs, Imposed the largest surcharge in the KFTC`s history - KRW 1 trillion 30 billion and the orders to rectify the unfair business model (2016/12/28). http://essentialpatentblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/64/2017/01/2016.12.28-KFTC-Press-Release-unofficial-Englsih-translation.pdf.
6.Antitrust: Commission opens two formal investigations against chipset supplier Qualcomm(2015/7/16), European Commission Press Release Database. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5383_en.htm
7.Antitrust: Commission fines Qualcomm €997 million for abuse of dominant market position (2018/1/24), European Commission Press Release Database http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-421_en.htm
8.IEEE 802 network enhancements for the next decade Industry Connections Activity Initiation Document (ICAID) Version: 1.3, 2017-03-16. IEEE Standards Association. http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/iccom/IC17-001-01_IE.pdf.
9.IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws. http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/sb_bylaws.pdf
10.Ex ante disclosure of licensing terms, ETSI. http://www.etsi.org/about/how-we-work/intellectual-property-rights-iprs/ex-ante-disclosures
11.ETSI Intellectual Property Rights Policy (2017)
12.Antitrust: Commission opens two formal investigations against chipset supplier Qualcomm (2015/7/16), European Commission Press Release Database, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5383_en.htm
13.Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property. U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. https://www.justice.gov/atr/IPguidelines/download
14.Factsheet - Standard Essential Patents. European Commission. Retrieved from: http://europa.eu/rapid/attachment/IP-17-4942/en/Factsheet%20-%20Standard%20Essential%20Patents.pdf.
15.Setting out the EU approach to Standard Essential Patents (2017/11/29). European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26583/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native.
16.Global cellular baseband processor revenue share by vendor from 2014 to 2016, Statistics. https://www.statista.com/statistics/427073/cellular-baseband-processor-supplier-share/
17.Sravan Kundojjala, Stuart Robinson, & Christopher Taylor (2018/1/8). Baseband Market Share Tracker Q3 2017: Qualcomm Gains Share. Strategy Analystics. https://www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/components/rf-and-wireless/reports/report-detail/baseband-market-share-tracker-q3-2017-qualcomm-gains-share#.WulgSohuY2x
18.Communication from the Commission to the Institutions on Setting out the EU approach to Standard Essential Patents. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26583
19.Antitrust: Commission opens proceedings against Samsung, European Commission. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-89_en.htm
20.Report by the EAGCP, An economic approach to Article 82, p8 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/competition/economist/eagcp_july_21_05.pdf
21.Karen Campbell, Jim Diffley, Bob Flanagan, Bill Morelli, Brendan O’Neil, Francis Sideco (2017.Jan.). The 5G Economy: How 5G technology will contribute to the global economy. IHS Economics & IHS Techonology Economic Impact Analysis. https://cdn.ihs.com/www/pdf/IHS-Technology-5G-Economic-Impact-Study.pdf.
（五）網際網路
1.About 3GPP, Retrieved Apri. 11 2018, from http://www.3gpp.org/about-3gpp
2.What are standards?, IEEE, Retrieved May 22, from: http://standards.ieee.org/develop/overview.html
3.About WSC, World Standards Cooperation, Retrieved May 22, from: https://www.worldstandardscooperation.org/about/
4.What are standards? ETSI, Retrieved May 22, from: http://www.etsi.org/standards/what-are-standards.
5.How are standards made? IEEE, Retrieved May 22, from: http://standards.ieee.org/develop/process.html.
6.How we develop standards, Retrieved May 22, from: https://www.iso.org/developing-standards.html
7.Qualcomm Report Segment, , Retrieved Apri 7 2018, from: http://investor.qualcomm.com/reportingsegments.cfm
8.Global cellular baseband processor revenue share by vendor from 2014 to 2016, , Retrieved Mar. 26 2018, from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/427073/cellular-baseband-processor-supplier-share/, statista
9.Qualcomm 2016 Annual Report of Form 10-K For the Fiscal Year Ended September 25, 2016, p10-13, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/QCOM/6180434255x0x915400/CD71F5A8-BEAA-4EEE-B385-2CD75B48B9D3/2016_Annual_Report_Form_10-K.pdf
10.Qualcomm Announces First Quarter Fiscal 2018 Results, Qualcomm, , Retrieved May 13 2018, from: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/QCOM/6180434255x0x970100/92139AD2-4BBB-4F30-8D4B-F5C867BFEA87/FY_2018_1st_Quarter_Earnings_Release.pdf
11.Mike Freeman (2018/4/27). Qualcomm tweaks patent licensing scheme; Will it help end legal war with Apple?, The San Diego Union Tribune, Retrieved May 23 2018, from:: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-qualcomm-framework-20180427-story.html
12.Qualcomm Comments on Apple Complaint (2017/1/20), Qualcomm Press Release, Retrieved June 23 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/01/20/qualcomm-comments-apple-complaint
13.Qualcomm Confirms Receipt of Korea Fair Trade Commission`s Case Examiner’s Report (2015/11/17). Qualcomm Press Announcements, , Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/11/17/qualcomm-confirms-receipt-korea-fair-trade-commissions-case-examiners
14.Qualcomm Responds to Announcement by Korea Fair Trade Commission (2016/12/27), Qualcomm Press Announcement, , Retrieved May 2 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2016/12/27/qualcomm-responds-announcement-korea-fair-trade-commission
15.Qualcomm Stay Appeal Denied by Seoul High Court on Absence of Irreparable Harm; Appeal to Seoul High Court on Merits of the Case to Proceed (2017/9/4), Qualcomm Press Announcement, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/09/04/qualcomm-stay-appeal-denied-seoul-high-court-absence-irreparable-har
16.Qualcomm Disagrees with Decision by Taiwan Fair Trade Commission and Intends to Seek a Stay and Appeal the Decision (2017/10/11), Qualcomm Press Announcements, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/10/11/qualcomm-disagrees-decision-taiwan-fair-trade-commission-and-intends-seek
17.NVIDIA to Wind Down Icera Modem Operations (2015/5/5), NVIDIA, Retrieved May 5 2018, from: https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-to-wind-down-icera-modem-operations
18.Roumeliotis, Liana B. Baker (2018/3/13). Broadcom to end bid for Qualcomm, keeps plan to move to U.S.: sources, Reuter, from : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qualcomm-m-a-broadcom/broadcom-to-end-bid-for-qualcomm-keeps-plan-to-move-to-u-s-sources-idUSKCN1GP1ND.
19.Antitrust: Commission sends two Statements of Objections on exclusivity payments and predatory pricing to Qualcomm(2015/12/8), European Commission Press Release Database, Retrieved Apri. 30, from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6271_en.htm
20.Case AT.40220 – Qualcomm (exclusivity payments) Commission Decision of 24/01/2018, from: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/40220/40220_2395_3.pdf.
21.Qualcomm to Appeal European Commission Decision Regarding Modem Chip Agreement (2018/1/24), Qualcomm Press Announcement, Retrieved May 5 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2018/01/24/qualcomm-appeal-european-commission-decision-regarding-modem-chip-agreement
22.Qualcomm to Enhance Development of Taiwan’s Wireless Ecosystem Through the Qualcomm Innovation Lab – Taiwan (2017/8/10), Qualcomm Press Announcements. Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/08/10/qualcomm-enhance-development-taiwans-wireless-ecosystem-through-qualcomm
23.Taiwan’s 5G Value Chain Expected to Output $134 billion and Support 510K jobs in 2035 (2017/8/10), Qualcomm Press Announcements, Retrieved May 13 2018, from: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2017/08/10/taiwans-5g-value-chain-expected-output-134-billion-and-support-510k-jobs
24.Gottfried Schüll, International report - The Dusseldorf World Patent Court?(2012/4/18), Retrieved Apri. 9 2018, from: 　 http://www.iam-media.com/reports/Detail.aspx?g=adfe3855-9a8f-4dd8-97a4-974716411f01
25.Dr. Stefan M. Zech, Jochen Kilchert, Dr. Stephan Held, Christian Hess, Tilman Pfrang and Dr. Tobias Wuttke, Patent enforcement through the courts in Germany(2018/2/19), Retrieved Apr. 9 2018, from: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=b12d6f05-d05a-47fc-b7b0-e6c3dcfd1aaa
26.Aaron Tilley (2017/1/20). Apple Sues Qualcomm For $1 Billion, Alleging Extortion, Forbes, Retrieved Jun 7 2018, from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2017/01/20/apple-sues-qualcomm-for-1-billion-over-royalties/#1819729d41f5

三、日文文獻
（一）書籍
丸島儀一(2011)。知的財産戦略―技術で事業を強くするために。東京：ダイヤモンド社。
（二）報告與官方文件
1.不公正な取引方法に関する基本的考え力(昭和57年)，獨占禁止法研究會，6-7。
2.ICT 国際標準化推進ガイドライン(2008)。研究開発・標準化戦略委員会，日本総務省， http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/policyreports/joho_tsusin/kenkyu_kaihatsu/pdf/080606_1_sa7.pdf，14-16。
3.知的財産の利用に関する独占禁止法上の指針，(平成28年1月21日)。公正取引委員會。參見: http://www.jftc.go.jp/dk/guideline/unyoukijun/chitekizaisan.html。
（三）期刊
平山賢太郎 (2014)。独禁法から考える 知的財産権ライセンス拒絶．差止請求，13-14，パテント Vol.67 No.12。
（四）判決與行政處分
1.知財高裁平成25年（ネ）第10043号。
2.公正取引委員会平成21年排除措置命令書（措）第22号。
（五）網際網路
独占禁止法研究会の開催について(平成28年2月10日)，公正取引委員会，參見：https://www.jftc.go.jp/houdou/pressrelease/h28/feb/160210_3.html (最終瀏覽日：2018/8/19)。		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.TIIPM.025.2018.F08-