Within the global governance framework of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), the injunction system with significant extraterritorial effects has become a core issue of sustained attention in international law circles regarding its functional positioning and institutional application. This study focuses on 5G SEPs, employing multidimensional methodologies including literature analysis, comparative law research, and empirical case studies to systematically explore the challenges faced by injunctions in transnational intellectual property disputes and pathways for regulatory restructuring. The research identifies three dilemmas in injunctions during litigation: first, conflicts between jurisdictional authority and judicial sovereignty; second, disagreements over the interpretation of the FRAND principle; and third, discrepancies in global licensing fee calculation methods. To address these challenges, the paper proposes three pathways for reconstructing injunction rules: Firstly, a governance framework centered on the core concept of technology as a public good should be established, emphasizing the public interest nature of technical standards. Secondly, international organizations should be encouraged to jointly develop unified institutional norms, thereby enhancing the universality and authority of the rules. Thirdly, on the basis of ensuring the reasonable exercise of judicial sovereignty, a comprehensive process management of disputes should be achieved through the institutionalization of the "prevention-resolution-integration" principle within international etiquette and multilateral cooperation mechanisms. By safeguarding the rational exercise of judicial sovereignty, this approach facilitates smooth global circulation of technical standards, providing a practical solution for global governance of 5G SEP disputes.

Lin Wanyan. The Application Dilemma and Rule Reconstruction of Injunction——Taking 5G Standard Essential Patents as an Example. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology (2025), Vol. 7, Issue 7: 37-43. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFS.2025.070706.

[1] Ou Fuyong, Injunction in International Civil Litigation, Peking University Press, 2007, pp. 14-16.

[2] Zhang Shuian: The Resolution Mechanism of International Civil Procedure Conflict under the <brussels Convention> System--A Review of the Application of Article 21 of the <brussels Convention>, published in Dongyue Forum, No.10,2006.

[3] Zhong Chun: Judicial Response to Anti-Injunction in International Patent Litigation, Intellectual Property, No.4, 2018.

[4] See "Anti-Injunction granted by French Courts", published on January 17,2020 on the WeChat public account "Darts-ip Global IP Case Database".

[5] Zhang Hui-bin and Liu Shi-lei. Jurisdictional Disputes and Strategic Choices in Standard Essential Patent Licensing Disputes [J]. International Journal of Economic Law, 2023(04):80-95.

[6] Xie Guangqi. On the Response to the EU v. China Intellectual Property Injunction Case [J]. Times of Law, 2023,21(06):58-67.

[7] Zhu Jianjun. Conflicts and Responses Between Standard Essential Patent Injunctions and Counter-Injunctions [J]. Intellectual Property, 2021(6):14.

[8] Zheng Lunxing. Institutional Challenges and Responses to the Convergence of Technical Standards and Patent Rights [J]. Science and Technology Progress & Countermeasures, 2018,35(12):139-144.

[9] "Second Instance Civil Ruling on the Dispute between Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. and Comsen Wireless License Co., Ltd. on Confirmation of Non-Infringement of Patent Rights", (2019) Zhi Min Zhong No.732,733 and 734-1 of the Supreme Peoples Court.

[10]  ABBOTT F M, COTTIER T, GURRY F. International intel‐ lectual property in an integrated world economy fourth edition[M]. New York: Wolters Kluwer, 2019: 156.

[11] Unwired Planet v Huawei,[2018] EWCA Civ 2344, para.26. 

[12] Lv Ziqiao. On the Calculation of FRAND License Fees for 5G Standard Essential Patents: Focusing on Pre-Valuation Equilibrium [J]. Science and Law, 2019(5):10-17.

[13] China Electronics Technology Standardization Institute. Artificial Intelligence Standardization White Paper (2018 Edition) [EB/OL]. (2018-01-24). http://www. cesi.

[14] Zhang Junrong and Fu Jinhao. The Intrinsic Logic of Global Governance in Standard Essential Patent Injunctions [J]. International Journal of Economic Law, 2024(04):113-124.

[15] Guangdong Provincial High Peoples Court Intellectual Property Tribunal. Research on Legal Issues of Standard Essential Patents in the Telecommunications Field [M]. Beijing: Intellectual Property Publishing House, 2020:35-309. 

[16] Optis Wireless Tech.,LLC.v.Huawei Device Co.,Ltd.,2018 WL 476054 (E.D.Tex.2019).

[17] In November 2014, the UK High Court of Patent Appeal ruled that European Patent No.1,212,919 (UK) was valid. See Vringo Infrastructure Inc.v.ZTE (UK) Ltd. [2014] EWHC 3924 (Pat).

[18] See civil Ruling (2020) Yue 03 Min Chu No.689 of Shenzhen Intermediate Peoples Court, Guangdong Province.

[19] See the Civil Ruling (2020) Zui Gao Fa Zhi Min Xuan Zhong No.517 of the Supreme Peoples Court.

[20] Ning Lizhi and Gong Tao. Global Fee Arbitration of Standard Essential Patents: Practice, Disputes, and Strategies [J]. North Law Journal, 2022,16(03):38-52.

[21] Jiang Huasheng. Research on Normative Interpretation and Judicial Adjudication of the FRAND Principle in Standard Essential Patents [J]. Law Application, 2023(07):123-137.

[22] Rui Songyan. Determination of FRAND License Fees in Standard Essential Patent Cases [J]. Political and Legal Forum, 2024,42(06):108-117.

[23] See Zhou Zexia: Theoretical Basis of Economic Analysis of Intellectual Property Law —— Discussion Based on the Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law, Legal and Political Forum, No.4, 2018.

[24] Zheng Lunxing. Determination Method of Standard Essential Patent License Fees Under FRAND Commitment [J]. Law, 2022(05):146-158.

[25] See Georgia-Pacific Corp.v.U.S.Plywood Corp.,318 U.S.1116,1120(S.D.N.Y.1970). 

[26] Yuan Rixin, "Research on Optimizing the Calculation Method of Standard Essential Patent Licensing Fees" [J]. Journal of Mass Standardization, 2023(11):96-98.

[27] Zhang Yurong, Zhang Xiaona. Research on the Calculation Method of Patent Licensing Fees for Essential Standards in the Information and Communication Technology Industry—— Based on the Comparison between TCLs Case Against Ericsson and UPs Case Against Huawei [J]. China Science and Technology Forum, 2019, (12):126-135.

[28] See civil Judgment No.857 of Shenzhen Intermediate Peoples Court on Civil Minchu (2011) and Civil Judgment No.305 of Guangdong High Peoples Court on Civil Minsan (2013).

[29] Liu Ying. Calculation of Standard Essential Patent License Fees: Concepts, Principles and Methods [J]. Tsinghua Law Review, 2022,16(04):148-167.