Intellectual property rights and standardization: the case of GSM

Abstract

This paper investigates the role of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in the process of standardization in the telecommunications industry. We take the global system for mobile communications (GSM) case as a highly relevant example, being part of a high-tech industry in which standards play a large role. In the process of designing the GSM standard, a lot of attention has been given to IPRs, mainly to avoid a situation in which a single IPR holder could hamper or even totally block the development of the standard. Nevertheless, the ultimate GSM standard contains a large amount of so-called 'essential IPRs', i.e., IPRs without which the implementation of GSM products is impossible.The paper provides a general discussion of the development of GSM and presents a database on the essential IPRs in the GSM standard. This database has been compiled on the basis of international patent statistics, and the data that manufacturers have supplied to European Telecommunications Standards Institute, the European standardization body responsible for defining the GSM standard. We use this database to assess the dynamic IPR position of firms in the original GSM standard and its subsequent development.We use the GSM case to underline the importance of a general European policy with regard to IPRs and standardization, and derive several concrete recommendations for such a policy. r

Research profiling for ‘standardization and innovation’

“…1997-1999 to 2000-2002, compared with the record for the AGRs of other subject group domains. We interpreted that this growth originated from an expansion of research on mobile communication standards and innovation (Bekkers et al 2002;Bourreau and Dogan 2001;Kano 2000). The Chemistry group domain grew the most rapidly (26.0%) from 2000-2002 to 2003-2005, presumably (Lee and Percivall 2008;Lim 2008;Markus et al 2006;Zhu et al 2006).…”

“…These papers were chiefly in computer/info, and environment topic group domains. Some of these papers dealt with the relationship between IPR policy for standards-setting organizations and its interpretation in terms of competition policy or law (Bekkers et al 2002;Encaoua and Hollander 2002;Lemley 2002;Rysman and Simcoe 2008). In addition, they discuss how to manage innovation and IPR in knowledge-oriented economies and how to develop public policy for innovation, competition, standards, and IPR (Drahos and Maher 2004;Kim et al 2006).…”

Dominant design or multiple designs: the flash memory card case

“…When a firm has a superior technology and is in the position to prevent competitors from introducing slightly deviating copies, its design may become dominant (Suarez 2004 (Bekkers, Verspagen, and Smits 2002). Intellectual property rights may also be used to prevent the introduction of clones with features which differ slightly from the original technology which might hinder the general acceptance of this technology.…”

Dominant design or multiple designs: The Flash Memory Card case

“…When a firm has a superior technology and is in the position to prevent competitors from introducing slightly deviating copies, its design may become dominant (Suarez 2004 manufacturers to achieve dominance and may license to other manufacturers on attractive terms (Bekkers, Verspagen, and Smits 2002). Intellectual property rights may also be used to prevent the introduction of clones with features which differ slightly from the original technology which might hinder the general acceptance of this technology.…”