Developing Story
DOJ Position on SEP/RAND Antitrust Claims
The DOJ filed a statement of interest in Samsung v. Netlist asserting that SEP status does not create a presumption of antitrust market power, continuing its pattern of intervention in SEP/RAND disputes. This position narrows the antitrust counterclaim pathway for standard implementers while supporting SEP holders. The case and DOJ policy have broad implications for technology licensing strategy.
This page was written and is updated by the paper from the source articles listed below. Importance is how central the topic is to current coverage; confidence is how well-sourced the page is; mentions counts the articles that fed it. How the wiki works →
## DOJ Position on SEP/RAND Antitrust Claims
### Overview
The US Department of Justice has filed a statement of interest (SOI) in the Samsung v. Netlist patent litigation reinforcing its position that inclusion of a patent in a technical standard does not create a presumption of market power for antitrust purposes. This filing continues a pattern of DOJ intervention in SEP/RAND disputes.
### The Samsung–Netlist Dispute
- **Netlist**: Memory systems developer asserting standard essential patents (SEPs)
- **Samsung**: Consumer electronics giant; filed antitrust counterclaims alleging SEP abuse and false RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing promises
- **DOJ SOI**: Filed in April 2026, asking the court to reject antitrust liability based solely on standard inclusion
### DOJ's Core Legal Position
1. **No market power presumption**: SEP status alone does not establish the market power element required for antitrust claims.
2. **Consistent with prior interventions**: DOJ has filed similar SOIs in other SEP/RAND litigation — this is a deliberate, repeated policy stance.
3. **Pro-innovation framing**: DOJ appears concerned that expansive SEP antitrust liability could deter standard-setting participation.
### Strategic Implications
#### For SEP Holders
- DOJ position provides support for resisting antitrust counterclaims in licensing disputes.
- Standard participation remains legally safer with DOJ backing on market power question.
#### For Implementers / Licensees
- Antitrust counterclaims against SEP holders face higher bar with DOJ opposition.
- RAND breach claims in contract remain viable; antitrust route is narrowed.
#### For Standard-Setting Organizations
- DOJ's position reinforces SSO participation without per se antitrust exposure.
### Watch
- Court ruling on Samsung's antitrust counterclaims
- Whether DOJ files additional SEPs in other pending cases
- FTC posture alignment or divergence with DOJ
- ITC proceedings involving SEPs