4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Kidon Podcast: IP War Stories — David Cohen & Richard Vary
Kidon IP War Stories – David Cohen & Dragos Vilau
Kidon Podcast: War stories on the cutting edge of IP monetization – David Cohen and Eric Stasik
Propel: Standard Essential Patents and the self-driving industry
Nota Bene Episode 99: Unpacking the Pendulum of American Patent Policy Then, Now, and Forward with Rob Masters
SEP Litigation and the Internet of Things no.2
SEP Litigation and the Internet of Things
Podcast: IP(DC): 5G for the C-Suite: Patent Hold-Up or Hold-Out?
You May Be Exhausted Over Standard Essential Patents (And Not Even Know It)
This marks the first issue of WilmerHale’s FRAND Quarterly: Navigating the Global SEP Landscape, a bulletin that will highlight developments about the licensing, litigation, and regulation of patents that are or are claimed...more
In a report by IPlytics, published today, they have confirmed what most in the business already presumed: that ownership of 5G standard essential patents (SEPs) is becoming increasingly fragmented. That means, as each patent...more
III. Principles and Methods Adopted by Chinese Courts for Calculating SEP Royalties in Lawsuits in the Field of Communications - 1. Regarding Justiciability of SEP License Disputes in China - Interpretation of the Supreme...more
In October 2022, the Court of Appeal in the United Kingdom issued a unanimous decision in ruling that Apple must either accept global licensing terms before they have even been determined or face an injunction that would...more
In INVT SPE LLC v. ITC, the Federal Circuit affirmed an International Trade Commission (ITC) decision that held INVT’s patent claims were not essential to the LTE cellular communications standard. According to the court, INVT...more
Executive Summary - The 2013 statement was a favor to Apple and Google and was widely misinterpreted and misused (often intentionally by opportunistic infringers found by courts and/or the ITC to be “unwilling). It was...more
Apple’s long-term campaign to avoid paying FRAND SEP licensing fees continues unabated. In what has become a modus operendi, every time Apple’s license with a major SEP licensors – Ericsson, Nokia, Samsung, Motorola,...more
Recent developments indicate that the UK is a favorable jurisdiction that owners of standard essential patents (“SEP”) can leverage to obtain appropriate SEP rates from what would otherwise be unwilling licensees. ...more
Earlier this month the U.S. Department of Justice issued an updated Business Review Letter (BRL) for the IEEE patent policy. The new letter offers an important clarification on how antitrust analysis of standards...more
Qualcomm has for years dominated the market for cellphone chips. Its patented technologies have been included in many cellphone standards on the condition, common among standards setting organizations (SSOs), that Qualcomm...more
Apple and the Fearsome five are doing it again. The same people who pushed the fallacious “troll bogeyman”; engaged in PTAB proxy warfare, seemingly immunized by the “real party in interest doctrine”; invented the...more
As I have documented elsewhere, Apple, for quite a long time has been engaged in a sophisticated long-term quest to devalue (p7) standard essential patents (“Essential Patents”). This strategy is aimed at reducing, if not...more
The Fuzhou Intermediate People’s Court in China issued a preliminary injunction against Apple in connection with two patents asserted by Qualcomm. This decision, part of a global patent dispute between the parties, comes on...more
The Federal Trade Commission filed suit last week in federal court against Qualcomm, Inc., following its investigation launched in September 2014. The FTC alleges that the semiconductor manufacturer illegally maintained a...more
Last week, the FTC filed a complaint against Qualcomm, a manufacturer of baseband processors, which are chips included in cell phones and other products with cellular connectivity that allow the devices to connect to cell...more
The Federal Circuit Will Review Appeals from Inter Partes Review Proceedings Under the “Substantial Evidence” Standard - In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A., Appeal No. 2014-1779, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB IPR...more
Ericsson and Apple reportedly have settled the patent disputes between them, including those involving standard essential patents that were pending in district courts in California and Texas as well as in the U.S....more
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) rendered its highly anticipated ruling in Huawei v. ZTE on the enforcement of standard essential patents (SEPs) which are subject to a FRAND commitment. SEPs play a significant role in the...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (in a case that attracted a dozen amici briefs) affirmed a district court ruling by Circuit Judge Posner (sitting by designation) that the holder of the FRAND-encumbered SEP...more
On April 25, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in the appeal from Judge Posner’s ruling that denied both Motorola and Apple damages and injunctive relief in Apple Inc. v....more
Appellate Decision Sets Stage for Next Skirmish In The Apple vs. Samsung Smart Phone Wars - A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has concluded that the district court was within its...more
In a case where the district court denied Apple’s request for a permanent injunction against certain Samsung smartphones, the Federal Circuit has remanded the matter to the district court in order to reconsider its...more
In This Issue: • Smartphone War Update: Some of Apple’s Patents Survive Invalidity Challenge • Sale by Foreign Supplier Invalidated Patent • District Court Abused Discretion in Refusing to Keep Confidential...more
Earlier this summer, the Obama administration dealt a blow to Standard-Essential Patent (SEP) holders by reversing an International Trade Commission (ITC) exclusion order granted in favor of an SEP holder. This action...more
For the first time in 26 years, the White House exercised its veto authority over an International Trade Commission ("ITC") Exclusion Order. On June 4, 2013, the ITC determined in Investigation No. 337-TA-794 that Apple had...more