標準必要專利之專利權濫用與「公平、合理、無歧視」授權， 涉及電信產業相關通訊技術之研發與應用，以及標準制定組織對於 標準必要專利的專利權政策，若標準必要專利之專利權人已完成 「公平、合理、無歧視」授權之宣誓，未來是否仍得對標準技術的使用者，主張排除或預防侵害請求權？若專利權人並未完成此宣誓，則是否排除或預防侵害請求權的主張，便當然具備衡平的正當性？ 本文希望藉由解釋論與立法論的雙重角度，期能調和標準必要 專利相關專利權之行使與「公平、合理、無歧視」授權間之衝突。 當前我國積極參與第五代通信相關之研發與應用規劃，本文之成果 或可作為未來我國司法實務對於標準必要專利潛在爭議解決的參 考，同時對於未來因應標準必要專利可能的修法，亦提出相當程度 的指引與建議。

The issues concerning the SEP abuse and the FRAND licensing have been among the most significant disputes under patent law in various jurisdictions. The resolution of the aforesaid issues is highly relevant to the development and application of the technologies in the field of telecommunication. Further, the patent policy of the SSOs also plays a key role in avoiding the SEP abuse and facilitating the FRAND licensing. According to empirical evidence in the view of the comparable judicial practice, the hot question has always focused upon whether the SEP holder may be entitled to the injunctive relief against the implementer of the technical standard the SEPs are embedded on, after the patent pledge on the FRAND licensing was made. And if the answer is affirmative, under the consideration of the risk of hold-up and royalty-stacking, what situation where the injunctive relief was made is equitably justified under patent law? When the risk of reverse hold-upis recognized, how could the court decide if the injunctive relief is equitably justified? Based upon the lessons from US case law and EU judicial decisions (as well as the related scholarship), this Article tries to establish a feasible approach to correspond to the potential disputes on SEP abuse in Taiwan, in the aspects of law interpretation and prospective legislative recommendation. By proposing the reconciliation of the conflicting interests between the protection and the FRAND licensing of SEPs to fulfill the goal of patent law, this Article expects to provide with some instruction and reference to aid the courts and legislators in resolving the related potential disputes in the future.