Striking Balance between Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law Protection in Cases of Patent Abuse: A Comparative Study of Indonesia's and E.U.'s Approach

MUHAMMAD RIFKY WICAKSONO, Prof. M. Hawin

2014 | Skripsi | ILMU HUKUM

Persimpangan antara HKI dan hukum persaingan usaha mendapat perhatian yang signifikan di Uni Eropa karena terdapat fenomena hukum baru dimana perusahaan menyalahgunakan hak-hak yang diberikan oleh HKI guna menghambat persaingan usaha. Salah satu cara perusahaan mencapai ini adalah melalui penyalahgunaan paten. Namun sayangnya di Indonesia peraturan hukum yang berkaitan dengan persimpangan ini masih belum jelas dan masih sangat minim. Kekosongan hukum ini lah yang mendorong penulis untuk menerapkan metode penelitian komparatif-doktrinal untuk menganalisis bagaimana kerangka hukum Indonesia dan Uni Eropa menyeimbangkan kepentingan HKI dan hukum persaingan usaha dalam kasus penyalahgunaan paten. Tujuan utama dari penilitian komparatif ini adalah untuk menyusun serangkaian rekomendasi berdasarkan pengalaman Uni Eropa guna memperbaiki kekosongan hukum yang terdapat di Indonesia. Mengingat begitu banyak cara perusahaan dapat menyalahgunakan patennya untuk menghambat persaingan, penulis memutuskan untuk membatasi ruang lingkup penelitian ini dalam tiga bentuk penyalahgunaan paten; penolakan lisensi, patent pool dan cross licensing. Pada akhir penelitian, penulis menemukan dua pelajaran utama dari pendekatan Uni Eropa. Untuk kasus penolakan lisensi, tes essential facilities doctrine dalam kasus IMS dapat digunakan dalam menentukan apakah penolakan tersebut menyebabkan efek anti-kompetitif di pasar. Untuk isu patent pool dan cross licensing, kategorisasi paten menjadi paten substitusi, komplementer, esensial dan non-esensial memberi gambaran penting untuk menentukan mana paten yang akan menyebabkan efek anti-kompetitif jika mereka di masukkan dalam patent pool atau cross license.

The intersection between IP law and competition law has garnered significant attention in the EU because of a newfound legal phenomenon where companies abuse the rights granted by IPR in order to side-step competition regulations. One of the common means firms achieve this is through patent abuse. In Indonesia, however, the rules pertaining to this intersection are still unclear and minimal to say the least. This legal deficiency has prompted the author to employ a Comparative-Doctrinal research method to analyze how the Indonesian regulatory framework and the EU body of laws balance interests of IPR and competition law in cases of patent abuse. The ultimate goal of which is to devise a series of recommendations based on the EU experience as an antidote to Indonesia’s regulatory shortcomings. Bearing in mind the myriads of means companies abuse their patents to foreclose competition, the author decided to focus the scope of the present research to deal with three forms of patent abuse; refusal to license, patent pools and cross licensing. At the end of the research, the author discovered two principal lessons to be learnt from the EU approach to improve Indonesia’s regulations. For refusal to license, the essential facilities doctrine test in the IMS case should be utilized in determining whether the refusal causes anti-competitive harms on the market. On the issue of patent pools and cross licensing, the categorization of patents into substitute, complementary, essential and non-essential patents under the EC’s Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation provides an essential illustration as well as a preliminary filter to determine which patents would cause anti-competitive harms if they were pooled or cross licensed. Keywords: Competition Law, Intellectual Property, Patent Abuse, Essential Facilities.

Kata Kunci : Competition Law, Intellectual Property, Patent Abuse, Essential Facilities