Samsung approached the European Commission with a proposal intended to address concern about its patent licensing processes, following an investigation launched by the authorities early in 2012.

The EC said that the South Korean mobile phone number one had said it would not seek injunctions against vendors alleged to infringe its standards essential patents for a period of five years, as long as the other party agreed to a particular licensing framework.

This would include a negotiation period of up to 12 months, after which if no deal is reached, a ruling would come from either a court or an arbitrator, as agreed by the parties involved. If the parties cannot agree at this point, this dispute will also lead to arbitration.

Specialist website FOSS Patents questioned the fact that if the result of the first arbitration or court ruling is not agreed, this can only be appealed to a second arbitration panel – and not a court of law.

It said: “The net effect would be that the pursuit of injunctions would be considered OK if an implementer of a standard does not agree to arbitration on the patent holder’s terms.”

“This wouldn’t be the same straightforward extortion as demanding an out-of-this-world royalty rate or a cross-licensing involving non-SEPs, but it would create even greater legal uncertainty than the status quo,” FOSS Patents continued.

Samsung drew the attention of the EC by taking legal action based on its standards essential payments, which are deemed as “essential for the implementation of an industry standard developed by a single standard-setting organisation”.

These are meant to be licensed on a “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” basis, hence the Commissions involvement when such patents became a part of the ongoing disputes between Samsung and Apple.

The EC took a preliminary view that Samsung’s practices were “an abuse of a dominant market position prohibited by EU antitrust rules”.

The Commission is now inviting comments from interested parties on the proposal and, if it decides Samsung’s commitments address the competition concerns, can make them legally binding.