Recent actions by the US Department of Justice, the US Patent Office,
the US Federal Trade Commission (which handles antitrust and consumer
protection matters), and the US International Trade Commission (which
has the power to exclude imports which violate US patents) suggest
that US officials are starting to understand the proper way to handle
"standards-essential patents", that is, patented inventions which are
incorporated into standards and the patent owner has promised to
license under "reasonable and non-discriminatory" terms. It seems
that in some cases, patent owners have not followed through to issue
the required licenses, and then prosecuted other standard-users based
on patent infringement.
In particular (from the New York Times article linked below):
Over the years [...] companies took Motorola at its word and
developed products assuming they could routinely license Motorola's
patents. But Motorola later refused to license its standard-essential
patents and sought court injunctions to stop shipment of rival
products.
"After Google purchased Motorola [...] it continued these same
abusive practices."
In recent months, the F.T.C. has issued position papers and filed
friend-of-the-court briefs, opposing the motions for injunctions using
standard patents. The Justice Department and European regulators have
echoed the commission's stance.
"Justice Department and Patent Office Issue Policy Statement on
Patents"
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/justice-department-and-patent-office-issue-policy-statement-on-patents/
"On Google, F.T.C. Set Rules of War Over Patents"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/technology/in-google-patent-case-ftc-set-rules-of-engagement-for-battles.html?_r=0
"United States Department of Justice and United States Patent &
Trademark Office Policy Statement on Remedies for Standards-Essential
Patents Subject to Voluntary F/RAND Commitments"
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/290994.pdf
Dale