Brussels, 08/01/2013 (Agence Europe) - On 21 December 2012, the European Commission sent Samsung a statement of objections to the effect that Samsung's seeking of injunctions against Apple in various member states on the basis of its mobile phone standard-essential patents ("SEPs") amounts to an abuse of a dominant position prohibited by EU antitrust rules. While recourse to injunctions is a possible remedy for patent infringements, such conduct may be abusive where SEPs are concerned and the potential licensee (in this instance, Apple) is willing to negotiate a licence on Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (so-called "FRAND") terms. The sending of a Statement of Objections does not prejudge the final outcome of the investigation. Standards bodies generally require members to commit to license patents that they have declared essential for a standard on FRAND terms. This commitment is designed to ensure effective access to a standard for all market players and to prevent "hold-up" by a single SEP holder, since access to those patents which are standard-essential is a precondition for any company to sell interoperable products in the market. The Samsung SEPs in question relate to the European Telecommunications Standardisation Institute's (ETSI) 3G UMTS standard, a key industry standard for mobile and wireless communications. When this standard was adopted in Europe, Samsung gave a commitment that it would license the patents it had declared essential to the standard on FRAND terms. In 2011, Samsung started to seek injunctive relief before courts in various member states against Apple based on claimed infringements of certain of its 3G UMTS SEPs. Since injunctions generally involve a prohibition of the product infringing the patent being sold, such recourse risks excluding products from the market without justification and may distort licensing negotiations unduly in the SEP-holder's favour. The Commission points out that the preliminary view expressed in the statement of objections does not question the availability of injunctive relief for SEP holders outside the specific circumstances present in this case, for example in the case of unwilling licensees. (FG/transl.fl)