Avoid the antitrust trap in Asia

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Avoid the antitrust trap in Asia

Are Chinese regulators unfairly targeting overseas companies for antitrust violations, in a bid to defend domestic industries?

nov2014cover-400.jpg

Don't get caught out in Asia

That’s certainly what the American Chamber of Commerce in China suggested, in a report published last month. It said members were concerned about “selective and subjective enforcement” and that companies were being forced to license patents at low royalty rates.

The concerns follow high-profile investigations into Qualcomm and InterDigital, as well as opposition in China and Korea to the Microsoft-Nokia merger.

In the cover story in Managing IP’s November issue, now available online, our Asia editor Peter Leung examines antitrust issues in Australia, India and China, and asks whether there is any truth to these perceptions and whether foreign companies are in fact soft targets.

It’s a complex story, and Peter provides a guide to the overlapping jurisdiction of China’s three government agencies with responsibility for competition law (Mofcom, the SAIC and the NDRC) as well as recent developments in Australia (the Harper Review) and India (where antitrust enforcement has been focused on copyright licensing and the automobile industry).

Peter blogged earlier this year about FRAND issues in China, but his latest analysis confirms that antitrust investigations can affect all IP owners, whatever rights they own and whatever industry they are in. The likelihood is that scrutiny in Asia will only increase as local economies grow and IP becomes more prominent. International rights owners need to be prepared.

Subscribers can read “Asian governments focus on IP and competition issues” now. Non-subscribers can access it with a free trial. Contact Bobby Dohil with any access enquiries.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Susan Keston and Rachel Fetches at HGF explain why the CoA’s decision to grant the UPC’s first permanent injunction demonstrates the court’s readiness to diverge from national court judgments
IP, M&A, life sciences and competition partners advised on deal that brings together brands such as ‘Huggies’ and ‘Kleenex’ with ‘Band-Aid’ and ‘Tylenol’
Stability AI, represented by Bird & Bird, is not liable for secondary copyright infringement, though Fieldfisher client Getty succeeds in some trademark claims
Gift this article