Book review: Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law, Further Intersections of Public and Private Law
This book review is kindly provided by Vicente Zafrilla Díaz-Marta, who is a PhD Researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in the framework of EIPIN Innovation Society program funded by the European Commission (H2020- Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action) and member of the Spanish IP blog lvcentinvs.es. Here's the review:
Prof. Jorge Contreras, University
of Utah, is arguably one of the most
prolific scholars in the field of standardisation law. Two years after the
publication of his "Cambridge
Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: competition, antitrust and patents"
he has edited a new volume “Cambridge
Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: Further Intersections of Public and
Private Law” that, despite sharing the title, includes a series of aspects
related to standardisation which were not included in its older brother.
The book opens with a section on
“Standardisation and the State”. Chapter 1, authored by Panagiotis Delimatsis,
is titled “International Trade Law and Technical Standardisation Law”. In the
chapter, Prof. Delimatsis analyses technical standards from the perspective of
non-tariff barriers to trade and concludes that certain standards might have
been unduly benefit from the exception of article 2 WTO Agreement on Technical
Barriers to Trade (TBT). Hence the WTO should take a more demanding approach
towards standards.
Chapter 2 “Government use of the
standards in the United States and abroad” (abroad means EU) analyses the
standardisation process from the perspective of the involvement of governmental
bodies in the process. Emily S. Bremer concludes that in the US the
standardisation tends to be more decentralised and market driven and the
participation of public entities participate in standardisation in equal
footing as any other stakeholder, whereas in the EU there is a higher degree of
governmental involvement at all levels, including funding of standardisation
activities. The development of European Standards (ES) is a paradigmatic
example of the EU approach, which results on a partial externalisation of
regulatory competences.
Part II “Standardisation, health,
safety and liability” starts with Chapter 3 “Technical standards in health and
safety regulation: risk regimes, the new administrative and food safety
governance” where Timothy D. Lytton discusses the trends associated to the
mixed regulatory governance (public and private) regime. The author considers
that administrative law poses (legal) obstacles to the development of the
standards but also can contribute to their legitimation, and therefore
administrative law should be more permeable to the principles and practices
stemming from private standardisation.
Paul Verbruggen addresses in Chapter
4 the topic of “Tort Liability for Standards Development in the United States
and European Union”. The author considers that in the US, liability can arise
from a duty to care – depending on the degree of foreseeability of harm and the
degree of control of the SDO over the implementation of the standard – from the
voluntary undertaking rule – limited by the scope of the undertaking – and on
the basis of negligent representation. In the UE, on the other hand, civil
liability of SDOs has been a marginal topic while liability derived from distortions
of the internal market seems more promising.
Part III focuses in the
frequently oversighted interaction between “Copyright and Standards” Pamela
Samuelson and Kathryn Hashimoto analyse in Chapter 5 the protectability of
standards – understood as systems – by means of copyright – from a US
perspective. The authors argue that codes and “other systematic organizations
of information” are not eligible for copyright protection if “dictated by rules
or functionality”. In addition, they understand that both the scenes a faire
and merger doctrines can render the standards unprotectable. Finally, the
chapter focuses on the need of ensuring access to standards which are adopted
as laws and on the policy considerations which should be considered to discard the
incentives-based arguments that support granting copyright protection to
standards.
In Chapter 6 “Integrating
Technical Standards into Federal Regulations: Incorporation by Reference”,
deals with the “incorporation by reference” of standards into regulations in
the US. Daniel S. Sheffner approaches the topic from different angles,
including its genesis, its legal basis and the problems derived from the
conflict between copyright protection – still an open question – and the
public-access requirement. The Chapter finishes with an overview of the
solutions that public and private stakeholders have proposed to address the
public access problem.
Björn Lundqvist offers a
comprehensive EU perspective to the interaction copyright-standards by
analysing the CJUE´s James Elliot case in Chapter 7 “Public Law, European
Constitutionalism and Copyright in Standards” which left open the question on
whether there is an actual delegation of the European Commission to the SDOs
which might affect to (harmonised) standards’ copyright protection. The author
complements the analysis by reflecting upon the consequences of the James
Elliot case for standards from a competition law perspective and, ultimately,
from a free trade (internal market) perspective – with a special reference to
the Fra.bo case.
Jorge L. Contreras and Andrew T.
Hernacki change slightly the focus: their Chapter 8 “Termination of Copyright
Transfers and Technical Standards” analyses the (very) specific issue of
termination of copyright transfers in US. While advocating for an explicit
exclusion of standards from such right of transfers´ termination, the authors
argue that such right of termination is not of application to most standards
insofar they are joint works and arguably works-for-hire.
Part IV “Standards and software” begins
with Chapter 9 “Open Standards” where Jay P. Kesan, after reviewing the
successive attempts to arrive to an Open Standard definition, explain the
rationales for governmental bodies to opt for open standards to finalise with
the consequences of the adoption of open standards: the (vendor) lock-in
effects, the need for interoperability – also at governmental level – and the
need of developing standards that are capable of being used by many
implementations.
Martin Husovec´s Chapter 10
“Standardization, Open Source and Innovation: Sketching the Effect of IPR
Policies” dives into the (more and more relevant) interaction of standards and
open source, characterised as two pro-innovation processes that do not
necessarily conflict. By analysing the specification/implementation dynamics,
the author sketches some examples of fruitful interactions between both
realities. Nevertheless, the author points at the (sometimes apparent) conflict
among IPR rules – both at legal and business level – as one of the most
important barriers for a seamless cooperation.
Closely related to the prior one,
Chapter 11 – authored by David J. Kappos – “OSS and SDO: Symbiotic Functions in
the Innovation Equation” highlights the complementary role of Open Source
Standards and Standard Developing organizations to promote innovation. The
author argues that FRAND terms are useful for both governance models and,
moreover, that OS terms are compatible with FRAND terms. Thus, there are not
grounds to advocate for a modification of the SDOs´ IPR policies.
Last but not least, Part V, “Trademarks,
Certification Marks and Standards” starts with Chapter 12 “Trademarks,
Certification Marks and Technical Standards” authored by Jorge L. Contreras
analyses the role of trademarks linked to standards for consumers. The Chapter
includes a review of some basic aspects of trademarks and certification marks,
an explanation of how trademarks are using in standardisation – including the
distinctive use of standard names such as Bluetooth or WiFi and its use as
certification marks – and, finally the different approaches of SDOs to the
authorisation of use of their standards´ names.
Jeanne C. Fromer offers in Chapter
13 “The Unregulated Certification Mark(et)” an analysis of some of the
problematics associated to certification marks, in particular that the lack
(reduced level) of regulation of certification marks can lead to results which
are not aligned with the competition and welfare promotion function of
trademarks. For the author, more demanding requirements for certifiers and
antitrust scrutiny can contribute to a better functioning of the certification
mark system.
Finally, Chapter 14 “The
Certification Paradox” by Jonathan M. Barnett concludes that the certification
system succeeds on its role of bridging the asymmetries of information in the
market, yet occasionally fail. Prof. Barnett suggests that rather than
targeting the certifiers´ level of diligence, a closer control over the
organizational form of certifiers can contribute to reduce the number of
failures.
In conclusion, the book
complements the (already wide) range of topics covered by its older brother and
it is a breath of fresh air for those which are interested in standardisation and
do not want to hear about hold-up or hold-out for a while. The book is a must for those that
research in standardisation law beyond the patent and antitrust issues and
deals with some topics of growing importance, such as the interface of Open
Source and standardisation or the intersection of standards and trade.
Nevertheless, this Handbook might not be the best option to have a first
contact with standardisation law (and economics) or for having general taste of
the hot topics in the field: the first volume suits better either of these aims.
Published by: Cambridge University Press
eBook: eBooks.com €190.00
Publication Date: 2019
ISBN: 9781316416785
304 pages
Book review: Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law, Further Intersections of Public and Private Law
Reviewed by Hayleigh Bosher
on
Wednesday, February 26, 2020
Rating:
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html