No-Challenge Clauses in an SEP Licensing Agreement as an Abuse of a Dominant Position.

This article explores the issue of "no-challenge clauses" in Standard Essential Patent (SEP) licensing agreements and whether they are an abuse of a dominant position. It argues that adding such clauses is indeed an abuse and that licensees should have the right to question the validity of the patent. The article also addresses the argument that these clauses can reduce global litigation, stating that this argument alone is insufficient. It provides a summary of a court decision in Turkey where a company was fined for violating competition law by failing to comply with fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms and inserting a non-assertion of invalidity clause. The article discusses the importance of FRAND commitments in ensuring access to standardized technologies and highlights decisions made by the European Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding invalidity clauses in patent agreements. It concludes that including a right-to-terminate clause in a contract can be seen as an abuse of a dominant position. [Extracted from the article]