Posts

Showing posts with the label Unwired Planet

The Appeal - InterDigital Technology v Lenovo

Image
Royal Courts of Justice Author Anthony Majanlathi   Licence CC BY 2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Arnold, Nugee and Birss)  InterDigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2024] EWCA Civ 743 (12 July 2024) This was an appeal by the claimants, InterDigital Technology and others ("InterDigital") and a cross-appeal by the defendants, Lenovo Group Limited and others ("Lenovo") against the order of Mr Justice Mellor in InterDigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others [2023] EWHC 1578 (Pat) (27 June 2023). That order implemented his lordship's judgment in    InterDigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd (FRAND Judgment - Public Version) [2023] EWHC 539 (Pat) (16 March 2023) which I discussed in  Patents - Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others   on 21 March 2023.  Mr Justice Mellor req...

Patents - Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others

Image
Author Interdigital Licence CC BY-SA 4.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others    [2023]   EWHC 539 (Pat) 16 March 2023 This was the second time that an English court had been called upon to determine what terms were fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") in a licence between holders of patents that are essential for compliance with a technical standard ("standard essential patent" or "SEPs") and those wishing to use those patents to comply with the standard ("implementers").  The other time was in  Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies (UK) Ltd and another  [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) ("UPHC").  Mr Justice Birss (as he then was) settled an agreement on FRAND  terms which he annexed to his judgment in  Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and another [2017] EWHC 1304 (Pa...

FRAND - Nokia Technologies v Oneplus Technology

Image
Supreme People's Court of the Peoples' Republic of China Author ONUnicorn   Licence CC BY-SA 3.0   Source Wikimedia   Common   J ane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon)  Nokia Technologies OY and another v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and other s (Rev1) [2021] EWHC 2952 (Pat) (4 Nov 2021) This was an application to HH Judge Hacon sitting as a judge of the Patents Court to set aside service of patent infringement proceedings on defendants that had been incorporated in China and to stay the action against the defendants that had been incorporated here to abide the outcome of proceedings in China to determine the terms of a FRAND licence for the claimants' patent portfolio on the basis that China was the more appropriate forum.  Alternatively, a stay of the whole action or at least the determination of the licence terms was sought on case management grounds.        The applicants contended that the circumstances that had led to...

Optis v Apple - Trial F: Whether an Implementor is bound to take a Licence on FRAND Terms before knowing what they are

Image
A uthor a jay_suresh   Licence CC BY 2.0   Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Meade)  Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others v Apple Retail UK Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 2564 (Pat) (27 Sep 2021) This was one of a number of trials between Optis Cellular Technologies LLC, Cellular Wireless Technologies LLC and Unwired Planet International Limited ("Optis") of the one part and Apple Retail UK Ltd, Apple Distribution International Ltd and Apple Inc ("Apple") on the other.  Optis has alleged that Apple's iPhone, iPad and other 3G and 4G devices infringe 8 of its standard-essential patents ("SEP") when implementing an  ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute ) standard.  The litigation addresses the following questions.  The first is whether certain patents that have been granted to Optis are essential for the implementation of the standard.  If they are, the second question is whether the p...

The Vestel Appeal: Vestel Elektronik v Access Advance

Image
Author Wags05  Licence Copyright waived by the Author   Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Nugee and Birss and Lady Justice Laing)  Vestel Elektronik Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.S. and another v Access Advance LLC and another [2021] (26 March 2021) [2021] WLR(D) 178, [2021] EWCA Civ 440 Many of the tellies that are sold in this country under such brands as Toshiba, Hitachi, Telefunken and Panasonic are actually made in Turkey by  Vestel Elektronik Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.S . and distributed by the Vestel group's British company Vestel UK Ltd.  In this article, "Vestel" refers to both Vestel companies.  Access Advance LLC  administers the HEVC patent pool.  HEVC is a video compression technology which is defined by the International Telecommunication Union H.265 recommendation. One of the members of that pool is Koninklijke Philips NV.  Vestel's Claim Vestel applied to Access Advance for a licence to use Philips's patents under Acces...