Japan’s First SEP Injunction – The Significance of the Pixel 7 Judgment and Practical Implications

In June 2024, the Tokyo District Court issued an injunction against Google Japan, prohibiting the sale of the Pixel 7 smartphone for infringing a standard-essential patent (SEP) related to wireless communications held by Korea’s Pantech. This is believed to be the first time in Japan that an injunction has been granted on the basis of SEP infringement, making it a landmark decision in Japanese IP practice.

The central issues in this case were whether the Pixel 7 infringed a 4G SEP and whether Pantech, as the patent holder, was entitled to an injunction. Traditionally, in Japan, injunctions based on SEPs for which a FRAND declaration (a commitment to Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory licensing) has been made are not granted as long as there has been good faith license negotiation. This practice has been established following the 2014 Grand Panel Judgment of the IP High Court (Samsung v. Apple).

However, in this case, Google failed to disclose information necessary for calculating royalties and otherwise acted uncooperatively in negotiations, even after the court’s recommendation for settlement. The court found that “there is no evidence that Google was willing to obtain a license,” and dismissed the argument of abuse of rights. As a result, Pantech’s request for an injunction was granted.

This decision aligns with recent trends in Europe, such as the UPC (Unified Patent Court) and the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH), which emphasize the sincerity of FRAND negotiations when considering injunctions. It is a sign that Japanese practice is now keeping pace with international standards.

That said, this judgment only concerns the Pixel 7, a model that has already been discontinued, so the immediate business impact is limited. However, Pantech has already sought provisional injunctions against the Pixel 8 and later models, and future developments will be closely watched.

From a business perspective, it is now more important than ever to conduct FRAND negotiations in good faith and to ensure sufficient disclosure of information. For manufacturers relying on standard technologies, it is critical to reassess licensing strategies with an eye to international litigation risks.

References