Iron still need their own hard! Siemens patents encircled domestic mobile phone manufacturers, but many patents were invalidated.

2018Beginning in the second half of the year, Siemens used its patent rights to frequently wave patent sticks to domestic mobile phone manufacturers.2018Year9Month28Siemens sued Meizu to the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court for infringement of its patent rights. At the same time, Siemens sued Xiaomi for patent infringement to the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court.2018Year10Month8on suspicion of patent infringement,vivoHe was sued by Siemens to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, of which two patents were involved, and the amount claimed for each patent was1000Ten thousand yuan. in addition,OPPOHe was also sued by Siemens to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. It can be seen that, in addition to Huawei, the domestic mainstream mobile phone manufacturers are not spared, have become the object of litigation of Siemens.

Of course, obtaining corresponding compensation through patent litigation is not the main purpose of Siemens's patent litigation. It is their real purpose to promote patent licensing cooperation through patent litigation. Such cases are common in the field of mobile phones. The most typical cases are Qualcomm and Apple, which have initiated patent lawsuits in many countries around the world, and even many of Apple's mobile phones have been banned from sale in the Chinese market and the German market.2019Year4A settlement was finally reached in January, and Apple paid a large settlement fee and will continue to purchase from Qualcomm.5GChip. And domestic mobile phone manufacturers, there are also and foreign giants from the saber-rattling litigation to the final settlement of the case.2016Year11Month14day,OPPOandvivoHe was sued by Dolby to the High Court of New Delhi, India, in order not to affect the continued production and sale of mobile phones in the Indian market,OPPOandvivoOn the one hand willing to pay the court every equipment34Rs. margin, on the other hand, they expressed their willingness to continue with DolbyFRAND(Fair and reasonable non-discriminatory) negotiation of patent licensing terms. Eventually, in2018Year3Month19Day, Dolby andOPPOThe joint announcement said that the two sides formally established a global intellectual property strategic partnership, the two sides will be in DolbyHIt's ACA.and other audio, video andJPEG-HDRWin-win cooperation in the field of technology.

In the above examples of Qualcomm and Dolby Labs, these companies that took the initiative to attack eventually got what they wanted and finally reached a strategic partnership with the accused company. However, Siemens does not seem to have such good luck.2018Year11Month19two patents designed in a lawsuit filed against Siemens,vivoA patent invalidation request was filed with the Patent Reexamination Board of the State Intellectual Property Office. The two patents involved are related to communication technology. The two patents are "Methods for selecting transmission channels and base stations, mobile terminals and mobile wireless networks" (Its application number is200480023688.X) And "Method and device for estimating channel quality" (its application number is201010120482.6), the application time of the former is2004years, the latter's application time is2003Year. In2G,3GIn the era, Siemens was also an important player in the mobile phone market. Siemens is the third largest mobile phone manufacturer in the world, and the application time of these two patents is also the time when Siemens has a greater influence in the communications or mobile phone business. Xiaomi and Meizu respectively wrote another article entitled "Closed-loop antenna diversity method, subscriber station and base station in cellular wireless communication system" (its application number is02813713.2) of the patent makes a request for invalidation.

At present, the reexamination and invalidation trial departments of the State Intellectual Property Patent Office are trying these three patents respectively.The "method and apparatus for estimating channel quality" made a decision to "declare part of the patent invalid", while the other two patents were declared invalid in their entirety. Because the invalidation trial of the patents involved has not yet produced results, it is impossible to determine the number of patents Siemens sued domestic mobile phone manufacturers. However, from the cases that have been heard so far, Siemens' patent encirclement and suppression of domestic manufacturers is obviously not successful. In order to reach patent licensing cooperation, Siemens must first prove the high quality of its patents. If the inefficiency of the patent is too high, it will inevitably affect the later negotiation of patent licensing cooperation between Siemens and various mobile phone manufacturers.

From the case of Siemens patent encirclement and suppression of Chinese mobile phone manufacturers, it can be seen that in order to exercise one's patent right and realize it through patent right, one must first evaluate the stability of one's own patent. If one does not carry out the evaluation and rashly attack, it is likely that, like Siemens, the patent will be invalid and the loss outweighs the gain. Secondly, in the process of applying for patents, enterprises need to check the quality of patents, and high-quality patent texts are the basis for enterprises to exercise patent rights. Finally, enterprises should also pay attention to the accumulation of intellectual property rights. This time Siemens encircled and suppressed major mobile phone manufacturers in China, but Huawei was spared. Siemens' fear of Huawei's huge patent group is one of the factors that Huawei was spared. At a critical time, Huawei's accumulation of intellectual property rights provided it with a defensive tool from litigation.