Paper: GS – III, Subject: Science and Technology, Topic: Intellectual Property Rights, Issue: Linkage between competition and patent laws.
Context:
The recent Delhi High Court ruling restricted the Competition Commission of India (CCI) from intervening in patent-related disputes.
Key Highlights:
The Patent–Competition Law Conflict:
- Patent rights create temporary monopolies, while competition law discourages monopoly abuse.
- The challenge lies in balancing innovation incentives with market fairness.
Recent Judicial Context:
The Ericsson Case:
- CCI initiated an investigation into alleged overcharging and abuse of dominance by Ericsson over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) related to telecom technologies (e.g., 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi).
- However, the Delhi High Court ruled that the Patents Act being a special statute, prevails over the Competition Act. Hence, CCI cannot intervene in patent-related disputes.
- The ruling was criticised on the grounds that it ignored the public dimension of competition law — which protects markets and consumers, not just private rights.
Legal and Jurisdictional Issues:
- Overlap of Two Statutes: While thePatent Act grants exclusive rights to inventors, the competition Act prevents misuse of market power. The principle of “special law prevails over general law” not fully applicable since both are special statutes.
· Flaws in “Private Settlement” Logic court’s view that a “private settlement can fix market issues” is flawed — as market-wide competition is affected, not just individual disputes.
Global Best Practices:
· European Union (EU): EU Court of Justice in Huawei vs. ZTE (2015) established that competition law overrides abuse in patent licensing.
· United States & China: Both recognise that competition authorities can intervene when patent rights distort markets or limit innovation.
Way Forward:
- CCI should have clear statutory authority to investigate IPR-linked anti-competitive practices.
- Framework for coordination between CCI and Patent Office can avoid jurisdictional conflict.
- Courts should lay down clear principles for concurrent jurisdiction.
- Government can issue guidelines similar to EU standards to regulate licensing and SEP disputes.
- Encourage fair licensing practices that support India’s digital economy and Make in India initiatives.
Conclusion:
India must adopt a balanced, globally aligned framework allowing concurrent jurisdiction for patent and competition authorities. It must maintain checks on excessive monopoly control, ensuring innovation without exploitation.
La Excellence IAS Academy, the best IAS coaching in Hyderabad, known for delivering quality content and conceptual clarity for UPSC 2025 preparation.
FOLLOW US ON:
◉ YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/@CivilsPrepTeam
◉ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LaExcellenceIAS
◉ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/laexcellenceiasacademy/
GET IN TOUCH:
Contact us at info@laex.in, https://laex.in/contact-us/
or Call us @ +91 9052 29 2929, +91 9052 99 2929, +91 9154 24 2140
OUR BRANCHES:
Head Office: H No: 1-10-225A, Beside AEVA Fertility Center, Ashok Nagar Extension, VV Giri Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad, 500020
Madhapur: Flat no: 301, survey no 58-60, Guttala begumpet Madhapur metro pillar: 1524, Rangareddy Hyderabad, Telangana 500081
Bangalore: Plot No: 99, 2nd floor, 80 Feet Road, Beside Poorvika Mobiles, Chandra Layout, Attiguppe, Near Vijaya Nagara, Bengaluru, 560040
