A Hitchhiker's Guide to Antitrust and Intellectual Property Guidelines

W
WilmerHale

Contributor

WilmerHale provides legal representation across a comprehensive range of practice areas critical to the success of its clients. With a staunch commitment to public service, the firm is a leader in pro bono representation. WilmerHale is 1,000 lawyers strong with 12 offices in the United States, Europe and Asia.
Almost 22 years ago, the U.S. antitrust enforcement agencies issued their Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intel - lectual Property (IPG).
United States Antitrust/Competition Law
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Almost 22 years ago, the U.S. antitrust enforcement agencies issued their Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intel - lectual Property (IPG).1 Styled as an effort to "assist those who need to predict whether the Agencies will challenge a practice as anticompetitive,"2 the decision to memorialize basic enforcement principles for the application of U.S. antitrust law to the licensing of IP has proven to be hugely influential throughout the world. Many jurisdictions have followed the United States in developing guidance for the business community on questions regarding IP rights and antitrust law. Prominent examples include the European Union,3 Canada,4 Korea,5 and Japan.

Click here to continue reading this article & footnotes in full

Originally published in Antitrust, Vol. 31, No. 2, Spring 2017, by the American Bar Association

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More