natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the context of a settlement and non-assertion agreement, non-challenge clauses are generally considered to fall outside Article 53(1).
V okviru sporazuma o poravnavi in sporazuma o neuveljavljanju pravic klavzule o neizpodbijanju na splošno ne sodijo v področje uporabe člena 53(1).
It is inherent in such agreements that the parties agree not to challenge ex post the intellectual property rights covered by the agreement.
Za takšne sporazume je značilno, da se stranke sporazumejo, da ne bodo naknadno izpodbijale pravic intelektualne lastnine, ki so predmet sporazuma.
Indeed, the very purpose of the agreement is to settle existing disputes and/or to avoid future disputes.
Osnovni namen takega sporazuma je dejansko rešiti obstoječe spore in/ali preprečiti spore v prihodnosti.
Technology pools
Tehnološka združenja
Technology pools are defined as arrangements whereby two or more parties assemble a package of technology which is licensed not only to contributors to the pool but also to third parties.
Tehnološka združenja so opredeljena kot dogovori, pri katerih dve ali več strank vzpostavi tehnološki paket, ki se ne licencira le članom združenja, temveč tudi tretjim.
In terms of their structure technology pools can take the form of simple arrangements between a limited number of parties or elaborate organisational arrangements whereby the organisation of the licensing of the pooled technologies is entrusted to a separate entity.
Tehnološka združenja so z vidika strukture lahko v obliki preprostih dogovorov med omejenim številom strank ali pa dodelanih organizacijskih dogovorov, pri katerih je organizacija podelitve licence za združene tehnologije zaupana neodvisnemu organu.
In both cases the pool may allow licensees to operate on the market on the basis of a single licence.
V obeh primerih lahko združenje pridobiteljem licenc omogoča, da na trgu delujejo na podlagi ene same licence.
There is no inherent link between technology pools and standards, but in some cases the technologies in the pool support (wholly or partly) a de facto or de jure industry standard.
Tehnološka združenja in standardi niso tesno povezani, vendar v nekaterih primerih tehnologije v okviru združenja podpirajo (v celoti ali deloma) dejanski ali zakoniti industrijski standard.
When technology pools support an industry standard they do not necessarily support a single standard.
Če tehnološka združenja podpirajo industrijski standard, ni nujno, da podpirajo en sam standard.
Different technology pools may support competing standards.
Različna tehnološka združenja lahko podpirajo konkurenčne standarde.
Agreements establishing technology pools and setting out the terms and conditions for their operation are not - irrespective of the number of parties - covered by the block exemption (cf. section III.2.2 above).
Sporazumi, s katerimi se ustanavljajo tehnološka združenja in določajo pogoji za njihovo delovanje niso - ne glede na število strank - zajeti v skupinski izjemi (glej podpoglavje III.2.2 zgoraj).
Such agreements are addressed only by these guidelines.
Takšne sporazume urejajo izključno te smernice.
Pooling arrangements give rise to a number of particular issues regarding the selection of the included technologies and the operation of the pool, which do not arise in the context of other types of licensing.
Sporazumi o ustanovitvi tehnoloških združenj sprožajo številna specifična vprašanja glede izbire tehnologij, ki so sestavni del združenja, in vodenja združenja, ki pa se ne pojavljajo v okviru drugih oblik licenciranja.
The individual licences granted by the pool to third party licensees, however, are treated like other licence agreements, which are block exempted when the conditions set out in the TTBER are fulfilled, including the requirements of Article 4 of the TTBER containing the list of hardcore restrictions.
Vendar pa se posamezne licence, ki jih združenja podelijo tretjim pridobiteljem licenc, obravnavajo kot ostali licenčni sporazumi, ki so predmet skupinske izjeme, če so izpolnjeni pogoji iz TTBER, vključno z zahtevami iz člena 4 TTBER, ki vsebuje seznam nedopustnih omejitev.
Technology pools may be restrictive of competition.
Tehnološka združenja lahko omejujejo konkurenco.
The creation of a technology pool necessarily implies joint selling of the pooled technologies, which in the case of pools composed solely or predominantly of substitute technologies amounts to a price fixing cartel.
Ustanovitev tehnološkega združenja nujno pomeni skupno prodajo združenih tehnologij, kar v primeru združenj, ki so nastala izključno ali pretežno z združitvijo nadomestnih tehnologij, ustreza kartelu o določitvi cen.
Moreover, in addition to reducing competition between the parties, technology pools may also, in particular when they support an industry standard or establish a de facto industry standard, result in a reduction of innovation by foreclosing alternative technologies.
Poleg tega lahko tehnološka združenja ne le zmanjšujejo konkurenco med strankami, temveč tudi privedejo do zmanjšanja inovacij, zlasti če podpirajo industrijski standard ali vzpostavijo dejanski industrijski standard, ker izključujejo nadomestne tehnologije.
The existence of the standard and the related technology pool may make it more difficult for new and improved technologies to enter the market.
Obstoječi standard in ustrezno tehnološko združenje lahko novim in izboljšanim tehnologijam otežita vstop na trg.
Technology pools can also produce pro-competitive effects, in particular by reducing transaction costs and by setting a limit on cumulative royalties to avoid double marginalisation.
Tehnološka združenja imajo lahko tudi spodbujevalne učinke na konkurenco, zlasti z zniževanjem transakcijskih stroškov in določanjem pragov za kumulativne licenčnine, da se prepreči dvojna marginalizacija.
The creation of a pool allows for one-stop licensing of the technologies covered by the pool.
Ustanovitev združenja omogoča, da se tehnologije, ki so vključene v združenje, licencirajo vse z enega mesta.
This is particularly important in sectors where intellectual property rights are prevalent and where in order to operate on the market licences need to be obtained from a significant number of licensors.
To je še zlasti pomembno v sektorjih, v katerih prevladujejo pravice intelektualne lastnine in v katerih je za delovanje na trgu treba pridobiti licence od znatnega števila dajalcev licenc.
In cases where licensees receive on-going services concerning the application of the licensed technology, joint licensing and servicing can lead to further cost reductions.
Če so pridobiteljem licenc zagotovljene stalne storitve v zvezi z uporabo licenčne tehnologije, lahko skupno podeljevanje licenc in opravljanje storitev privede do dodatnih znižanj stroškov.
The nature of the pooled technologies
Narava združenih tehnologij
The competitive risks and the efficiency enhancing potential of technology pools depend to a large extent on the relationship between the pooled technologies and their relationship with technologies outside the pool.
V zvezi s tehnološkimi združenji so tveganja za konkurenco in možna povečanja učinkovitosti v veliki meri odvisna od razmerja med združenimi tehnologijami in njihovega razmerja s tehnologijami zunaj združenja.
Two basic distinctions must be made, namely (a) between technological complements and technological substitutes and (b) between essential and non-essential technologies.
Treba je razlikovati med dvema osnovnima skupinama, in sicer (a) dopolnilnimi tehnologijami in nadomestnimi tehnologijami ter med (b) bistvenimi in nebistvenimi tehnologijami.
Two technologies [68] are complements as opposed to substitutes when they are both required to produce the product or carry out the process to which the technologies relate.
Tehnologiji [68] nista nadomestni, temveč dopolnilni, če sta obe nujni za proizvodnjo izdelka ali izvedbo procesa, na katerega se navezujeta.
Conversely, two technologies are substitutes when either technology allows the holder to produce the product or carry out the process to which the technologies relate.
Nasprotno sta tehnologiji nadomestni, če vsaka posebej omogočata imetniku bodisi proizvodnjo izdelka ali izvedbo procesa, na katerega se navezujeta.
A technology is essential as opposed to non-essential if there are no substitutes for that technology inside or outside the pool and the technology in question constitutes a necessary part of the package of technologies for the purposes of producing the product(s) or carrying out the process(es) to which the pool relates.
Tehnologija je bistvena, v nasprotju z nebistveno, če za navedeno tehnologijo ni nadomestnih tehnologij znotraj ali zunaj združenja in če je zadevna tehnologija nujni del tehnološkega paketa za namene proizvodnje izdelka(-ov) ali izvedbe procesa(-ov), na katerega(-e) se združenje navezuje.
A technology for which there are no substitutes, remains essential as long as the technology is covered by at least one valid intellectual property right.
Tehnologija, za katero ne obstajajo nadomestne tehnologije, je bistvena, dokler tehnologijo pokriva vsaj ena veljavna pravica intelektualne lastnine.
Technologies that are essential are by necessity also complements.
Bistvene tehnologije so nujno tudi dopolnilne.
When technologies in a pool are substitutes, royalties are likely to be higher than they would otherwise be, because licensees do not benefit from rivalry between the technologies in question.
Če so tehnologije v okviru združenja nadomestljive, je več verjetnosti, da bodo licenčnine višje, kot bi bile v nasprotnem primeru, ker pridobitelji licenc nimajo koristi od konkurenčnosti med zadevnimi tehnologijami.
When the technologies in the pool are complements the arrangement reduces transaction costs and may lead to lower overall royalties because the parties are in a position to fix a common royalty for the package as opposed to each fixing a royalty which does not take account of the royalty fixed by others.
Če so tehnologije v okviru združenja dopolnilne, dogovor znižuje transakcijske stroške in lahko privede do skupno nižjih licenčnin, ker lahko stranke določijo skupno licenčnino za paket, namesto da licenčnine določijo posamično in ne glede na licenčnine, ki jih določijo drugi.
The distinction between complementary and substitute technologies is not clear-cut in all cases, since technologies may be substitutes in part and complements in part.
Razlikovanje med dopolnilnimi in nadomestnimi tehnologijami ni povsem jasno v vseh primerih, ker so lahko tehnologije le delno nadomestne in le delno dopolnilne.
When due to efficiencies stemming from the integration of two technologies licensees are likely to demand both technologies the technologies are treated as complements even if they are partly substitutable.
Če je verjetno, da bodo pridobitelji licenc zaradi učinkovitosti, ki izhajajo iz združitve dveh tehnologij, povpraševali po licenci za obe tehnologiji, se ti tehnologiji obravnavata kot dopolnilni, tudi če sta delno nadomestni.
In such cases it is likely that in the absence of the pool licensees would want to licence both technologies due to the additional economic benefit of employing both technologies as opposed to employing only one of them.
V takšnih primerih je verjetno, da bi v primeru neobstoja združenja pridobitelji licenc želeli pridobiti licenco za obe tehnologiji, ker lahko uporaba obeh tehnologij v primerjavi z uporabo le ene od njiju ustvari dodatne gospodarske koristi.
The inclusion in the pool of substitute technologies restricts inter-technology competition and amounts to collective bundling.
Vključitev nadomestnih tehnologij v združenje omejuje konkurenco med tehnologijami in je enakovredna skupnemu podeljevanju licenčnih paketov.
Moreover, where the pool is substantially composed of substitute technologies, the arrangement amounts to price fixing between competitors.
Če je združenje poleg tega sestavljeno pretežno iz nadomestnih tehnologij, je dogovor enakovreden dogovoru o določitvi cen med konkurenti.
As a general rule the EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the inclusion of substitute technologies in the pool constitutes a violation of Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Praviloma Nadzorni organ EFTA meni, da vključitev nadomestnih tehnologij v združenje pomeni kršitev člena 53(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The Authority also considers that it is unlikely that the conditions of Article 53(3) will be fulfilled in the case of pools comprising to a significant extent substitute technologies.
Nadzorni organ prav tako meni, da ni verjetno, da bi bili pogoji iz člena 53(3) izpolnjeni v primeru združenj, ki vključujejo številne nadomestne tehnologije.
Given that the technologies in question are alternatives, no transaction cost savings accrue from including both technologies in the pool.
Ker sta zadevni tehnologiji nadomestni, vključitev obeh tehnologij v združenje ne privede do nobenih prihrankov transakcijskih stroškov.
In the absence of the pool licensees would not have demanded both technologies.
V primeru neobstoja združenja pridobitelji licenc ne bi povpraševali po licenci za obe tehnologiji.
It is not sufficient that the parties remain free to license independently.
Ne zadostuje, da lahko stranke neodvisno podeljujejo licence.
In order not to undermine the pool, which allows them to jointly exercise market power, the parties are likely to have little incentive to do so.
Da ne bi oslabile združenja, ki jim omogoča, da skupno uveljavljajo tržno moč, stranke temu verjetno ne bodo v veliki meri naklonjene.
When a pool is composed only of technologies that are essential and therefore by necessity also complements, the creation of the pool as such generally falls outside Article 53(1) irrespective of the market position of the parties.
Če je združenje sestavljeno le iz bistvenih tehnologij, ki so torej nujno tudi dopolnilne, ustanovitev združenja kot takega praviloma ne sodi v področje uporabe člena 53(1), ne glede na tržni položaj strank.
However, the conditions on which licences are granted may be caught by Article 53(1).
Vendar pa lahko člen 53(1) zajema pogoje za podelitev licence.
Where non-essential but complementary patents are included in the pool there is a risk of foreclosure of third party technologies.
Če so v združenje vključeni nebistveni, a dopolnilni patenti, obstaja tveganje izključitve tehnologij tretjih.
Once a technology is included in the pool and is licensed as part of the package, licensees are likely to have little incentive to license a competing technology when the royalty paid for the package already covers a substitute technology.
Ko je tehnologija vključena v združenje in se licencira kot del paketa, je verjetno, da bodo pridobitelji licenc imeli majhne spodbude za prevzem licence za konkurenčne tehnologije, če licenčnina, ki se plača za paket, že vključuje nadomestno tehnologijo.
Moreover, the inclusion of technologies which are not necessary for the purposes of producing the product(s) or carrying out the process(es) to which the technology pool relates also forces licensees to pay for technology that they may not need.
Poleg tega morajo pridobitelji licenc z vključitvijo tehnologij, ki niso nujne za namene proizvodnje izdelka(-ov) ali izvedbe procesa(-ov), na katerega(-e) se tehnološko združenje navezuje, plačevati licenčnino za tehnologijo, ki je morda ne potrebujejo.
The inclusion of complementary patents thus amounts to collective bundling.
Vključitev dopolnilnih patentov tako ustreza skupni podelitvi licenčnega paketa.
When a pool encompasses non-essential technologies, the agreement is likely to be caught by Article 53(1) where the pool has a significant position on any relevant market.
Če združenje vključuje nebistvene tehnologije, je verjetno, da bo sporazum zajet v členu 53(1), v kolikor ima združenje pomemben položaj na katerem koli upoštevnem trgu.
Given that substitute and complementary technologies may be developed after the creation of the pool, the assessment of essentiality is an on-going process.
Ker se nadomestne in dopolnilne tehnologije lahko razvijajo tudi po ustanovitvi združenja, je presoja bistvenosti stalen proces.
A technology may therefore become non-essential after the creation of the pool due to the emergence of new third party technologies.
Tehnologija lahko zato po ustanovitvi združenja postane nebistvena zaradi pojava novih tehnologij tretjih.
One way to ensure that such third party technologies are not foreclosed is to exclude from the pool technologies that have become non-essential.
Eden izmed načinov za zagotovitev, da se takšnim tehnologijam tretjih ne prepreči dostop na trg, je iz združenja izključiti tehnologije, ki so postale nebistvene.
However, there may be other ways to ensure that third party technologies are not foreclosed.
Vendar pa lahko obstajajo drugi načini za preprečitev dostopa na trg tehnologijam tretjih.
In the assessment of technology pools comprising non-essential technologies, i.e. technologies for which substitutes exist outside the pool or which are not necessary in order to produce one or more products to which the pool relates, the EFTA Surveillance Authority will in its overall assessment, inter alia, take account of the following factors:
Pri presoji tehnoloških združenj, ki vključujejo nebistvene tehnologije, tj. tehnologije, za katere obstajajo nadomestne tehnologije zunaj združenja ali ki niso nujne za proizvodnjo enega ali več izdelkov, na katere se združenje navezuje, bo Nadzorni organ EFTA v svoji skupni presoji med drugim upošteval naslednje dejavnike:
whether there are any pro-competitive reasons for including the non-essential technologies in the pool;
ali obstajajo kakršni koli ugodni učinki na konkurenco, ki upravičujejo vključitev nebistvenih tehnologij v združenje;
whether the licensors remain free to license their respective technologies independently.
ali lahko dajalci licenc neodvisno licencirajo svoje tehnologije.
Where the pool is composed of a limited number of technologies and there are substitute technologies outside the pool, licensees may want to put together their own technological package composed partly of technology forming part of the pool and partly of technology owned by third parties;
Če je združenje sestavljeno iz omejenega števila tehnologij in zunaj združenja obstajajo nadomestne tehnologije, si morda pridobitelji licenc želijo vzpostaviti svoj lasten tehnološki paket, delno sestavljen iz tehnologij, ki pripadajo združenju, in delno iz tehnologij, ki so v lasti tretjih;
whether, in cases where the pooled technologies have different applications some of which do not require using all of the pooled technologies, the pool offers the technologies only as a single package or whether it offers separate packages for distinct applications.
ali združenje v primerih, ko imajo združene tehnologije različne načine uporabe in za nekatere od njih ni potrebna uporaba vseh združenih tehnologij, ponuja tehnologije le v skupnem paketu ali posameznih paketih za ločene načine uporabe.
In the latter case it is avoided that technologies which are not essential to a particular product or process are tied to essential technologies;
V slednjem primeru se prepreči, da se tehnologije, ki za določen izdelek ali proces niso bistvene, vežejo na bistvene tehnologije;
whether the pooled technologies are available only as a single package or whether licensees have the possibility of obtaining a licence for only part of the package with a corresponding reduction of royalties.
ali so združene tehnologije na voljo zgolj kot skupni paket oziroma ali imajo pridobitelji licenc možnost pridobitve licence zgolj za del paketa z ustreznim znižanjem licenčnin.
The possibility to obtain a licence for only part of the package may reduce the risk of foreclosure of third party technologies outside the pool, in particular where the licensee obtains a corresponding reduction in royalties.
Možnost pridobitve licence zgolj za del paketa lahko zmanjša tveganje preprečitve dostopa na trg tehnologijam tretjih zunaj združenja, zlasti, če se pridobitelju licence prizna ustrezno znižanje licenčnine.
This requires that a share of the overall royalty has been assigned to each technology in the pool.
V skladu s tem je treba vsaki posamezni tehnologiji v okviru združenja dodeliti delež skupne licenčnine.
Where the licence agreements concluded between the pool and individual licensees are of relatively long duration and the pooled technology supports a de facto industry standard, it must also be taken into account that the pool may foreclose access to the market of new substitute technologies.
Če so licenčni sporazumi med združenjem in posameznimi pridobitelji licenc sklenjeni za sorazmerno dolgo časovno obdobje in če združena tehnologija podpira dejanski industrijski standard, je treba prav tako upoštevati, da lahko združenje prepreči dostop na trg novim nadomestnim tehnologijam.
In assessing the risk of foreclosure in such cases it is relevant to take into account whether or not licensees can terminate at reasonable notice part of the licence and obtain a corresponding reduction of royalties.
Pri presoji tveganja preprečitve dostopa na trg je v takšnih primerih pomembno upoštevati, ali lahko pridobitelji licenc v razumnem roku odpovejo del licenčnega sporazuma in dosežejo ustrezno znižanje licenčnin.
Assessment of individual restraints
Presoja posameznih omejitev
The purpose of this section is to address a certain number of restraints that in one form or another are commonly found in technology pools and which need to be assessed in the overall context of the pool.
Namen tega podpoglavja je obravnavati določeno število omejitev, ki se na različne načine pogosto pojavljajo v okviru tehnoloških združenj in ki jih je treba presoditi v splošnem kontekstu združenja.
It is recalled, cf. paragraph 212 above, that the TTBER applies to licence agreements concluded between the pool and third party licensees.
Treba je opozoriti – glej odstavek 212 zgoraj – da se TTBER uporablja za licenčne sporazume, sklenjene med združenjem in tretjimi pridobitelji licenc.
This section is therefore limited to addressing the creation of the pool and licensing issues that are particular to licensing in the context of technology pools.
To podpoglavje se zato omejuje na obravnavo vprašanj, povezanih z ustanovitvijo združenja in podeljevanjem licenc v okviru tehnoloških združenj.
In making its assessment the EFTA Surveillance Authority will be guided by the following main principles:
Nadzorni organ EFTA se bo pri presoji skliceval na naslednja poglavitna načela:
the stronger the market position of the pool the greater the risk of anti-competitive effects;
Močnejši kot je tržni položaj združenja, večje je tveganje protikonkurenčnih učinkov.
pools that hold a strong position on the market should be open and non-discriminatory;
Združenja, ki imajo močan položaj na trgu, bi morala biti odprta ter zagotavljati enako in nepristransko obravnavo.
pools should not unduly foreclose third party technologies or limit the creation of alternative pools.
Združenja ne bi smela neupravičeno preprečevati dostop na trg tehnologijam tretjih ali omejevati ustanavljanje alternativnih združenj.
Undertakings setting up a technology pool that is compatible with Article 53 of the EEA Agreement, and any industry standard that it may support, are normally free to negotiate and fix royalties for the technology package and each technology’s share of the royalties either before or after the standard is set.
Podjetja, ki ustanovijo tehnološko združenje, združljivo s členom 53 Sporazuma EGP, in vzpostavijo industrijski standard, ki ga združenje lahko podpira, se praviloma lahko pogajajo in določajo licenčnine za tehnološki paket in delež licenčnine za vsako posamezno tehnologijo bodisi pred ali po določitvi standarda.
Such agreement is inherent in the establishment of the standard or pool and cannot in itself be considered restrictive of competition and may in certain circumstances lead to more efficient outcomes.
Takšen sporazum je značilen za določitev standarda ali ustanovitev združenja in se ga samega po sebi ne more obravnavati, kot da bi omejeval konkurenco, ter lahko v nekaterih okoliščinah privede do učinkovitejših rezultatov.