In this study, we explore what happens when Standard-Essential Patents (SEPs) go to court. What we found surprised us. We expected that proving infringement of SEPs would be easy-they are, after all, supposed to be essential-but that the breadth of the patents might make them invalid. In fact, the evidence shows the opposite. SEPs are more likely to be held valid than a matched set of litigated non-SEP patents, but they are significantly less likely to be infringed. SEPs, then, don't seem to be all that essential, at least when they make it to court.
Mark A. Lemley and Timothy Simcoe, How Essential Are Standard-Essential Patents?, 104 Cornell L. Rev. 607
Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol104/iss3/2