The bottom of the card says more injunctions are bad.

Conflict arises when companies with the essential technology feel they’re being taken advantage of under the FRAND system.

“Innovators [need] to obtain injunctions to stop the use and sale of products infringing on their inventions,” a company called Empire IP said in comments on the policy shift. “The result of this policy would be less innovation in the United States and a further shift in global technological leadership to China and other competitors.”

If injunctions are too heavily used, though, or even if their use is just threatened, it can stifle innovation by discouraging companies from designing products based on the standardized technology.

Canon, the big camera technology company, said the use of injunctions “has been often a potentially important factor when we are implementers,” by which it means the legal maneuver can have a chilling effect when it considers using other companies’ essential technology in its products.

Whatever the broader impact on the competitive landscape from the policy shift, federal prosecutors intend to look for companies that try to game the process now that injunctive relief is once more off the table.

“The [DOJ] Antitrust Division will carefully scrutinize opportunistic conduct by any market player that threatens to stifle competition in violation of the law,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Jonathan Kanter said in a statement. “I am hopeful our case-by-case approach will encourage good-faith efforts to reach [fairly compensated] licenses.”