<論考>東京地裁SEP調停（SEPJM)の戦略的活用 <Article>Strategic Use of the Tokyo District Court's SEP Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)
副題：権利者・実施者双方が使えるSEP紛争解決の新制度
日本知的財産協会（JIPA) 「知財管理」Vol. 76 No. 8 2026 p.1040-1051掲載
執筆： 二又 俊文
転載許諾をいただきましたので
掲載いたします。
抄録
東京地方裁判所は2026年1月に「標準必須特許(SEP)に基づく特許権侵害訴訟の審理要 領(以下「SEP訴訟審理要領」という)を発表し，同年2月に「SEP調停(SEPJM:SEP Judicial Mediation )の審理要領」(以下「SEPJM審理要領」という)の運用を開始した。本制度は従来の差 止訴訟一本やりの構造を変え，権利者・実施者いずれからも申立可能な「交渉促進型」の紛争解決フ レームワークを裁判所が提供する日本型の試みである。本稿は判例解説よりも実務活用に焦点を当て， SEPJM誕生の背景となった一連の判決の意義，制度の核心的設計，そして権利者・実施者それぞれ の知財戦略・経営戦略への組み込み方を論じる。特に実施者・中小企業にとってのオフェンシブな活 用可能性と，SEP紛争に伴う多正面戦争コストを回避するビジネス上のメリットを具体的に示す。
New Article: Strategic Use of the Tokyo District Court's SEP Judicial Mediation (SEPJM)
A New Framework for SEP Dispute Resolution That Both Rights Holders and Implementers Can Use
Published in Chizai Kanri (知財管理), Journal of the Japan Intellectual Property Association, Vol. 76, No. 8 (2026), pp. 1040–1051 (in Japanese) By Toshifumi Futamata
In January 2026, the Tokyo District Court issued guidelines for hearing SEP infringement actions, and in February 2026 it began operating its accompanying SEP Judicial Mediation (SEPJM) guidelines. Together these mark a shift away from Japan's traditional injunction-centered approach to SEP disputes, toward a court-provided negotiation framework that either a rights holder or an implementer may initiate.
My latest article in Chizai Kanri looks at this system from a practitioner's angle: the judgments behind its creation, its core design, and how both sides can build it into their IP and business strategy.
Two points stand out for an international audience. First, SEPJM's offensive potential for implementers and SMEs, who rarely have the capacity to sustain a global, multi-jurisdiction fight and can instead use SEPJM to bring a dispute to the table on their own initiative. Second, the business case for avoiding the cost of a "multi-front war" — parallel litigation across jurisdictions is expensive and uncertain for both sides, and SEPJM offers a way to reduce that cost.
I would also place SEPJM within the wider landscape of SEP dispute resolution: unlike the court-independent mediation of Europe and the US, or China's court-led model, it is court-connected mediation — the court convenes the process and steers it, but does not decide the outcome.
Full analysis (in Japanese): Chizai Kanri, Vol. 76, No. 8 (2026), pp. 1040–1051.
コメント