High Court hands down $138.7m FRAND judgment
Apple slams Trump’s antitrust stance in FRAND cases
Pe3k / Shutterstock.com
InterDigital saw its claimed rate cut in a case that showed licensees can legitimately change their minds over terms, explains Mark Marfé of Pinsent Masons.
The England and Wales High Court has, on March 16, handed down its second-ever global fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing decision.
The judgment confirms the approach taken by the UK Supreme Court and in Birss J’s (as he then was) landmark first, instance judgment in Unwired Planet. This decision also provides further guidance as to how the parties negotiating such licences should conduct themselves.
The dispute between Lenovo, an implementer which specialises in designing, manufacturing, and marketing consumer electronic devices including mobile telephones, and InterDigital, which designs and develops a range of advanced technologies that are used in digital cellular and wireless products and networks, including 2G, 3G, 4G, arose over the licensing terms for use of telecoms patents owned by InterDigital. These had been declared essential (standard-essential patents, or SEPs) to the operation of the 3G, 4G and 5G standards set out by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI).
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at firstname.lastname@example.org
patents, FRAND, standard-essential, InterDigital, Lenovo, wireless, 3g, 4g, 5g, standards, ETSI, England and Wales High Court, Mellor, Birss, licence, rate