Æ÷½º³Ê Æǻ簡 ¾´ ÆÇ°á¹®¿¡¼ FRAND ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¾ð±Þ¿¡ ´ëÇØ Ç÷θ®¾È ¹Ä·¯°¡ Âù¼ºÇÏ¸é¼ ¾´ ³»¿ëÀε¥ ÇÑ ¹ø Àо ¸¸ ÇÕ´Ï´Ù.
¹Ä·¯¶ó´Â »ç¶÷ÀÌ ¸¶¼ÒÇÑÅ× µ·¹Þ°í ¹» Çß´Ù´ø°¡ º° Àü¹®°¡µµ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó´ø°¡ µîµî ¸»ÀÌ ¸¹±ä ÇÏÁö¸¸
Á¦°¡ º¸±â¿£ ÀÌ»ç¶÷¸¸Å Çؼ³ ÀßÇØÁÖ´Â »ç¶÷µµ ¾ø¾î¼ Àû´çÈ÷ °É·¯ µéÀ¸½Ã¸é µÉ °Í °°³×¿ä.
¾ÖÇà »ï¼º °£ À¯·´¿¡¼ÀÇ ¹ýÁ¤ °ø¹æ¿¡¼ Àû¾îµµ ±¹³» Ä¿¹Â´ÏƼµéÀÇ ¹ÝÀÀº¸´Ù´Â ÀÌ»ç¶÷ ¿¹ÃøÀÌ ¼ö½Ê¹è Á¤È®ÇÏ´õ¶ó°í¿ä.
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/06/judge-posners-dismissal-of-two-way.html The above paragraph is highly important. In debates over FRAND, many people fail to make the necessary distinction between the pre-standard-setting value of a patent and the value of standardization itself. SEP holders obviously like to argue that what they sell is a license to operate in a market: without a license, the phone won't dial into a network. But that value is a separate story from the intrinsic value of the innovation that a patent represents. A patent doesn't have to represent a particularly impressive innovation to be included in a standard. It's all just a bargaining process. The patent becomes powerful because of the collective market share of the companies engaged in standard-setting. That's the power of a cartel, not the power of innovation.
Judge Posner accurately refers to the differential between the value of a standard and the value of a patent contributed to it as "the hold-up value".
In my observation, standard-essential patents are, on average, not more but actually less of an innovative achievement than other patents. Most of those patents would have a commercial value of zero, or next to zero, if they weren't included in a standard. For example, they cover simple countdown algorithms, some of an infinity of encryption algorithms, etc. There are countless workarounds, but those workarounds cease to be available once the patented technique has become a mandatory part of a standard. If the standard prescribes only one way to encrypt data or to count down the number of packets to transmit, the availability of other ways to solve the same technical "problems" becomes irrelevant.
If patent holders were allowed to charge based on the value of standard-setting, they would unduly enrich themselves just because they were part of a standard-setting cartel.
¹ø¿ªÇϱ⠱ÍÂú¾Æ¼ ±×³É Ä«ÇǾØÆäÀ̽ºÆ®Çß½À´Ï´Ù.. Á˼ÛÇÕ´Ï´Ù.
±×¸®°í º£ÆÅ¿¡ ½ÇÁ¦·Î Ç¥ÁØƯÇã °ü·Ã ±â¼úÀ» ´Ù·ç½Ã´Â ºÐµµ ÀÖÀ¸½ÇÁö ¸ô¶ó¼ Á» Á¶½É½º·´Áö¸¸ ¹ýÀûÀÎ Ãø¸é¿¡¼ÀÇ Çؼ®Àº ÀÌÁ¤µµ°¡ ¾Æ´Ñ°¡ ÇÕ´Ï´Ù.
¿©±âÀú±â µ¹¾Æ´Ù³àº¸´Ùº¸´Ï±î.. (º£ÆÅÀº ¾Æ´Ï°í) À̹ø ÆÇ°áÀº Ç¥ÁØƯÇ㸦 °³¹ßÇÏ´Â ³ë·ÂÀ» ¹«½ÃÇϴ ó»ç´Ù ÀÌÁ¦ ¸ðµç ±â¾÷µéÀÌ Æ¯Ç㸦 Ç¥ÁØÈÇÏ·Á°í ³ë·ÂÇÏÁö ¾Ê°í µ¶Á¡ÇÏ·Á°í ÇÒ °ÍÀÌ´Ù ¶ó´Â ¹ÝÀÀÀÌ À¯µ¶ ¸¹´øµ¥. ¸¹ÀÌ »ý¶×¸ÂÀº ¹ÝÀÀÀÌÁÒ Ç¥ÁØÈµÈ Åë½ÅƯÇãÀÇ ´ëºÎºÐÀº Ç¥ÁØÀ¸·Î ÀÎÁ¤¹ÞÁö ¸øÇÏ¸é ¾Æ¿¹ °¡Ä¡°¡ ¾ø¾îÁö´Â °ÍÀε¥... ÀÚ±â ƯÇ㸦 Ç¥ÁØ¿¡ ¸¹ÀÌ ³©°Ü³ÖÀ»¼ö·Ï À¯¸®ÇÑ °ÍÀÌ º¯ÇÔ¾øÀ»°Å¶õ °Ç À̹ø ÆÇ°á°ú´Â ÀüÇô ¹«°üÇÑ »ç½Ç·Î °è¼Ó ³²À» °Ì´Ï´Ù.