Government Precedents,  Actions,   and public and private sector litigation  involving standards setting and IPR and Antitrust

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States of America, Plaintiff, v The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc, and the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors, Defendants  1972

The National Cooperative Research and Production Act  as amended by the Standards Development Organization Advancement Act of 2004 ( and US Antitrust law applicable to standards setting )

FTC v Rambus and Rambus v Infineon 2003

FTC v Dell Computer 1995  

Addamax v OSF and others 1997

Correspondence in 1968 Concerning the IBM transfer of "PL/I Language Specifications" and "Fortran" to a voluntary standards committee

Department of Justice   business review letters applicable to IPR in standards setting and  conduct of standards setting and association management 

FTC and DOJ Hearings Competition and Intellectual Property Law and Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy FTC and DOJ  cooperated during 2002 in a series of hearings entitled  Competition and Intellectual Property Law and Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy. A number of the hearings focused in particular on IPR and standards setting and Antitrust

ADVISORY OPINIONs AT THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION   applicable to Standards setting organizations

Guidelines for Patent Pools That Support a Standard Excerpted from pages 83 - 97 of Report on Multiparty Licensing 22 April, 2003 by  Charles River Associates for DG Competition

BRENT TOWNSHEND, Plaintiff, v. ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. and CONEXANT SYSTEMS, Inc., Defendants.  CONEXANT SYSTEMS, Inc., Defendant and Counterclaimant v. BRENT TOWNSHEND and 3COM Corporation,  Counter defendants

Wang v. Mitsubishi, [ Wang Laboratories, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Electronics America, 103 F.3d 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1997)]   representations in the market place that a standard is open and free for all to use, may lead to loss of ability to  assert  IPR  against people to whom you have made the representation

UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, (UNOCAL) Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, CHEVRON U.S.A. INC., EXXON CORPORATION, MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, SHELL OIL PRODUCTS COMPANY and TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING, INC.,  case of IPR in development of regulation

March 4 FTC Charges Unocal with Anticompetitive Conduct Related to Reformulated Gasoline Complaint Alleges Company Gained Monopoly Power by Defrauding the California Air Resources Board and Industry Groups During Phase 2 Gasoline Rulemaking

Product Liability in Japan: The Exploding T.V. Case

Patent investigation made by the European Commission concerning STDMA  in relation to international standardisation  December 1997 

GREATER ROCKFORD ENERGY AND TECHNOLOGY CORP., SHEPHERD OIL, INC., VIDALIA ETHANOL, LTD., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, MARATHON PETROLEUM COMPANY, AMOCO OIL COMPANY, INC., CHEVRON, U.S.A., INC., ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO., B.P. AMERICA, EXXON COMPANY, U.S.A. and MOBIL OIL CORPORATION,  Finding of no Anticompetitive Effect and validity of Noerr Pennington Defense in ASTM and API standards setting

Help America Vote Act of 2002 HR 3295 containing requirement that no private sector person may obtain an IPR to any guide link or the contents to any guide line issues by a Technical Guidelines Development committee 

In the Supreme Court of the United States Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc, Petitioner v. Peter Veeck, D/B/A Regional Web.  The question presented is: Whether copyright law gives the private organization the right to restrict individuals from making copies of the material incorporated by reference in the municipal codes.  May 30 Amicus Curiae brief by the Solicitor General of the US Department of Justice: No

FTC November 2001 letter to Attorneys for Sun Microsystems, " It is no longer in the public interest to continue this investigation, not withstanding the fact that the Commission has serious questions about the propriety of the underling conduct involved 

European Commission Precedent July 2002 to  contribute an opinion challenging the an IPR holders claim of essential IPR for an ETSI standard

Department of Justice and ETSI From OPENING MARKETS AND PROTECTING COMPETITION FOR AMERICA'S BUSINESSES AND CONSUMERS  April 7, 1995

ALLIED TUBE & CONDUIT CORPORATION, PETITIONER V. INDIAN HEAD, INC. No. 87-157 In the Supreme Court of the United States October Term, 1987

Department of Justice and ASTM   April 7, 1995 contention  that manufacturers of a product had arranged to utilize the American Society for Testing and Materials ("ASTM") standard setting process to blunt the competitive threat to traditional products posed by an innovative product

On July 11, 2002  Forgent Networks claimed  essential IPR in JPEG standard  Offers license terms.    July 19  JPEG committee thinks there is prior art...sets up web site to collect data     July 22 ZDNET story     Website created following the development

ISO,  W3C and TIA examples of published  standards   with respect to assertions of essential IPR but without accompanying statements of satisfactory licensing terms otherwise meeting the organizations procedures

OMB Circular No. A-119, "Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities." define the nature of standards that government agencies are obligated to consider before developing their own procurement or regulatory standards. (See OMB discussion in   Legislative and Regulatory Underpinnings of US Standards Activities.  April, 2000  A  definition for "voluntary consensus standard" in section 5 (i) contains the requirement that owners of relevant intellectual property have agreed to make that intellectual property available on a non-discriminatory, royalty-free or reasonable royalty basis to all interested parties

ESS Tech., Inc. v. PC-Tel, Inc.

3 F.C.C. 2d  Revised Patent Procedures of the Federal Communications Commission

Communication from the Commission  Intellectual Property Rights and Standardization  COM/92/445FINAL