Key Highlights                                                                                                                                                                           

·         Expanding SEP Scope Beyond Telecom

The session emphasized how ICT standards and SEPs are increasingly relevant to non-telecom sectors like

electric vehicles (EVs), healthcare, and AI, making traditional telecom-centric frameworks inadequate.

·         Challenges in SEP Licensing for Emerging Sectors

Issues raised include over-declaration of patents, lack of interoperability (e.g., EV charging connectors), opaque royalty calculation methods, and the power imbalance between global SEP holders and Indian startups.

·         Legal and Policy Gaps in India

Indian SEP jurisprudence is evolving but remains fragmented. Courts apply telecom SEP principles across sectors, yet formal negotiation protocols, clarity on FRAND terms, and sector-specific legislation are lacking.

·         Proposed Solutions and Models

Recommendations include industry-specific SEP frameworks, royalty-free pilots, joint licensing pools, licensing compliance checklists, and early patent disclosures. A need for clear national guidelines for SEP negotiations was also underscored.

·         Geopolitics and Global Standards

SEPs are increasingly seen as tools of industrial policy and geopolitical influence. China’s assertive stance, Europe’s declining share, and India’s low economic leverage were discussed in the context of global standard-setting power dynamics.

·         Call for Proactive and Inclusive SEP Ecosystem

The concluding remarks advocated for proactive standard-setting, especially in disruptive tech sectors, accessible licensing for MSMEs, and economic forums to guide policy beyond courtrooms—shifting the focus from litigation to innovation.

 About the Event                                                                                                                                                                           

NEW DELHI, 16^th April, 2025: Building on the first roundtable’s discussions on SEPs, this second edition expands the focus to emerging industries such as EVs, clean energy technologies (CETs), and AI, where SEPs are becoming increasingly critical. Hosted by the Advanced Study Institute of Asia and the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks the roundtable will bring together industry leaders, policymakers, legal experts, and academics to examine the challenges and opportunities in SEP licensing, enforcement, and regulation beyond telecom. Key discussion will touch on the extension of FRAND models to new industries for emerging technologies, international regulatory strategies, and the function of SSOs and patent pools in achieving a balance between innovation and fair access. By fostering collaborative dialogue, this initiative aims to shape a fair, transparent, and innovation-driven SEP ecosystem for emerging industries.

The colloquia opened with the first session on the theme “Reimagining SEP Licensing for Emerging Industries – Expanding Beyond Telecom.” Ms. Shivani Singh initiated the discussion by recapping insights from the previous roundtable and underscoring the need for the current dialogue. The session brought together experts from diverse fields, offering a rich, multidisciplinary perspective on the evolving landscape of SEP licensing beyond the telecom sector.

 What the Experts Said: Day 1                                                                                                                                                                           

The roundtable brought together an eminent panel of speakers, each providing valuable perspectives:

Mr. Hiroyuki Nakano Senior Director, Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO):

Mr. Nakano highlighted that over-declaration of patents often stems from uncertainty before standard finalization, and traditional cross-licensing practices in Japan—once effective within single industries—are now less viable due to the cross-sectoral nature of ICT standards. As new entrants, especially in sectors like automotive and healthcare, struggle with complex SEP licensing, Japan has responded with licensing negotiation guidelines (introduced in 2018 and revised in 2022) to promote fairness, transparency, and predictability. These guidelines assist in evaluating good faith during negotiations and in determining FRAND royalty terms. He recommended that India similarly consolidate its SEP jurisprudence into clear, accessible guidelines to support non-telecom firms navigating this space.

Mr. Anoop Jain Chief IP Counsel and Head IPR, Ather Energy:

Mr. Anoop Jain highlighted the critical role of ICT standards in the electric vehicle (EV) sector, noting challenges such as non-standard charging connectors and the absence of interoperable infrastructure, which Ather addressed

through BIS-adopted standards. He emphasized that existing SEP frameworks, designed for slower telecom cycles, lack the flexibility needed for rapidly evolving EV technologies. The imbalance in resources between global SEP holders and Indian startups hinders fair negotiations. To address these issues, he proposed sector-specific SEP frameworks, royalty-free licensing pilots, joint licensing models, and policy incentives for small innovators, along with simplified compliance tools and awareness programs to empower startups and ensure equitable access.

Mr. Parag Kar Independent Consultant, Former Vice President, Government Affairs, India and South Asia, Qualcomm:

Mr. Parag Kar emphasized that standards are crucial for scalability and interoperability, especially in telecom and emerging sectors like EVs and AI. While SEP licensing frameworks are intended to prevent monopolies through FRAND commitments, challenges such as over-declaration, lack of transparency in SEP databases, and inconsistent royalty models complicate their effectiveness. He noted that India's influence in global standard-setting is limited by its low economic leverage and lack of strategic investment in international SDOs. While domestic standards may suffice where global interoperability isn't essential, he stressed that meaningful reform and negotiation power in SEP frameworks depend on India's economic growth and deliberate policy engagement in global markets.

Ms. Apoorva Murali Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co:

Ms. Apoorva Murali emphasized that Indian courts are well-equipped to adjudicate SEP disputes across various sectors by applying principle-based frameworks originally developed in telecom cases. Citing the Delhi High Court’s application of telecom SEP jurisprudence to DVD standards, she highlighted the adaptability of legal principles like essentiality—requiring detailed technical validation—and FRAND, which depends on good faith, fair negotiation practices, and the conduct of parties. She stressed that transparent and non-discriminatory standardisation is essential for equitable technology access, ensuring that both incumbents and new entrants benefit while keeping consumer costs in check.

Mr. Amogh Dev Rai, Director-Research, Advanced Study Institute of Asia:

Prof. Amogh Rai underscored that SEPs are increasingly being used as instruments of industrial policy and geopolitical strategy, with the U.S. viewing standard-setting as potential market manipulation and China leveraging it under initiatives like “Made in China 2025.” He pointed to aggressive licensing tactics by Chinese courts, including low FRAND rates and global anti-suit injunctions, which have contributed to the EU’s declining share in global SEPs. Highlighting the limitations of current WTO mechanisms, he called for a TRIPS-like renegotiation and the establishment of economic forums to guide SEP policy. He warned that over-reliance on judicial control could undermine domestic innovation and advocated for economic impact assessments and a shift away from zero-sum geopolitical thinking.

Ms. Shreya Sampatkumar:

Ms. Shreya Sampathkumar highlighted that while India’s SEP jurisprudence is developing, it remains fragmented and tilted in favor of patentees, as seen in the Ericsson v Lava case where the court awarded ₹244 crore in damages. She noted the disconnect between competition law and patent law, and the inconsistent adoption of global legal precedents. Key gaps include the absence of cohesive negotiation protocols, weak competition oversight, and unclear royalty base calculations. While TSDSI mandates FRAND disclosures, the Patents Act lacks dedicated SEP provisions. To create a more balanced system, she recommended empowering the CCI, formalising negotiation processes,