Different from traditional fuel vehicles, the patent licensing of new energy vehicles (NEV) in battery materials, solid-state battery interface modification, and vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication protocols, showing stronger technological interdependence and broader supply chain coverage. 

Patent pools can reduce licensing costs, improve transaction efficiency, avoid litigation risks and accelerate technology diffusion by consolidating scattered patent resources, but the potential monopoly risks cannot be ignored. This article focuses on the five core challenges of patent pool construction, providing systematic insights for industry governance. 

1. Complementary patents as the core criteria for entering the pool

The efficiency of a patent pool depends on the complementarity of included patents—the technical solutions of different right holders need to synergize rather than compete to dismantle "patent jungle," lower transaction costs, and foster innovation. 

Independent third-party evaluation is a key mechanism for identifying patent essentiality. For example, Sisvel patent pool employs expert teams to screen WiFi 6 standard-essential patents (SEPs), eliminates conflicts of interest and quantifies patent value weights. With the development of AI technology, econometric modeling and semantic analysis have been introduced into patent value assessment, supplementing traditional expert evaluation，improving the scientificity and objectivity of patent screening.

2. Dual incentive mechanisms to drive industry participation

A patent pool’s commercial success depends on whether it can attract stakeholders across the industry chain.

For patent holders, some patent pools permit them to initiate infringement litigation on their own, where damages awarded not only increase revenue, but also strengthen IP protection, forming a virtuous cycle of "rights protection-revenue-technology diffusion". For licensees, patent pools lower barriers for SMEs through preferential strategies such as rate discounts and packaged licenses. This dual incentive enables patent pools to gather technical resources upstream and expand market reach downstream, ultimately forming competitive advantages of scale.

3. Flexible licensing mechanism to balance interests of all parties 

To balance efficiency and innovation, patent pools should allow voluntary licensing of the right holders based on centralized management. Taking the HEVC Advance Patent Pool as an example, the right holders retain full patent rights and can customize licensing terms beyond baseline rates, while the pool management agency refrains from interfering in pricing or transactions. Licensees also have pre-negotiation autonomy with patent holders. This management model reduces transaction costs without suppressing market vitality through monopolistic pricing.

4. Dynamic adaptation to technology cycle

Given the finite protection lifespan of patents and rapid NEV innovation, patent pools require dynamic mechanisms to achieve "renewal". The approach of Via LA Licensing Patent Pool offers significant references: establishing a multi-dimensional evaluation system and evaluating patent necessity and legal status by a technical committee during admission, expired or obsolete patents are purged regularly based on a patent dynamic management mechanism. Basic licensing fees are coupled with technology-tiered premium system, and rates are periodically reviewed in combination with industrial technology iteration cycles. The negotiation mechanism between the licensor and the licensee achieves a dynamic price balance, ensures the patent pool’s technical composition evolves synchronously with the industrial cycle to avoid legal risks from low-quality patents.

5. Systematic prevention of anti-monopoly

The centralized licensing model of patent pools invites antitrust review. In June 2024, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) issued its first antitrust "reminder and urging letter" system to the Avanci Patent Pool over potential SEP licensing risks in automotive wireless communication, requiring it to improve its compliance construction.

NEV patent pools must embed a full-process risk prevention and control system: 

excluding non-essential patents during patent screening, maintaining fee transparency and prohibiting bundling sales, conducting regular antitrust compliance assessments under frameworks of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law and the EU’s Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation (TTBER) to balance technology integration with market competition. 

From AutoIP

May 20th, 2025