SEPs

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing: China’s approach

China’s Approach OPPO v. Sharp (Supreme People’s Court, August 19, 2021): OPPO sued Sharp to determine global FRAND licensing rates for Sharp’s 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, and HEVC SEPs, following Sharp’s infringement lawsuits in Japan, Germany, and Taiwan. The SPC upheld the Guangzhou IP Court’s jurisdiction, citing OPPO’s Chinese manufacturing base and the parties’ intent to […]

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing: China’s approach Read More »

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing: Brazil’s approach

Brazil’s Approach SEPs and their licensing under FRAND terms have become critical issues in Brazil, a major smartphone market with over 160 million internet users, ranking as the fifth-largest globally. Brazil’s pro-patentee judicial environment has made it a hotspot for SEP enforcement, particularly in telecommunications, where SEPs underpin 2G––5G standards. Brazilian courts, especially in Rio de

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing: Brazil’s approach Read More »

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing. Patents vs. Competition

Background  This is a blog series on jurisdictional conflicts in Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing. In this series, we look at how different countries handle these disputes, which often span borders and involve high-stakes in tech. This series is based on a detailed analysis of key cases from 2010 to

Jurisdictional Conflicts in SEP / FRAND licensing. Patents vs. Competition Read More »

AMR-NB-WB

An Analysis of the Chinese Supreme Peoples Court decision in Adavanced Codec Tech. LLC v. Oppo: Case No. (2022) Sup. Court Zhimin Zhong No. 907, 910, 911, 916, 917, 918

Summary:  This post covers the decision of the Supreme People’s Court of China’s decision in the case of Advanced Codec Technologies, LLC v. Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. (Case Nos. (2022) Zhimin Zhong 907, 910, 911, 916, 917, 918, decided on December 12, 2023) addresses a complex dispute over Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms  for Standard Essential Patents (SEPs).   This case involves six patents related to

An Analysis of the Chinese Supreme Peoples Court decision in Adavanced Codec Tech. LLC v. Oppo: Case No. (2022) Sup. Court Zhimin Zhong No. 907, 910, 911, 916, 917, 918 Read More »

Phone having hedonic regression equation

An Analysis of the Chinese Court decision in Oppo v. Nokia: Case No. (2021) Yu 01 Min Chu No. 1232

Summary:  In July 2023, a Division Bench ofthe Delhi High Court had in the appeal filed by Oppo against Nokia,  held that a single judge could issue pro tem orders mandating security deposits for securing the interests of the patentee during the time the litigation persists.  Oppo appealed to the Supreme Court of India, but the

An Analysis of the Chinese Court decision in Oppo v. Nokia: Case No. (2021) Yu 01 Min Chu No. 1232 Read More »

SEP / /FRAND Related decisions across the globe

This posts lists out the number of cases that have been filed across the globe regarding Standard Essential Patents (SEPs).  The different jurisdictions are: 

Delhi High Court; UK High Court (EWHC) Business and Property Courts, Court of Appeal (EWCA);  Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; Courts in Germany including Munich ; Mannheim, Karlsruhe, State of Rio de Janeiro Judiciary, Supreme People’s Court (China), etc.   Various decisions issued by Competition authorities across the globe are also listed.   Each of these decisions can be accessed from the Resources Tab on this website on the respective page.

SEP / /FRAND Related decisions across the globe Read More »

Delhi HC Becomes the Go to Venue for Adjudicating SEP Disputes in India

A couple of days ago, InterDigital filed two patent infringement law suits against Xiaomi at the Delhi High Court (DHC) for infringement of its standard essential patents (SEPs). The matters are CS(Comm) 295/2020 and 296/2020 for infringement of its patents related to cellular and H.265/HEVC – (video compression) technologies. These are IN262910; IN295912 ; IN298719;  IN313036; &

Delhi HC Becomes the Go to Venue for Adjudicating SEP Disputes in India Read More »

Chinese Court issues anti-suit injunction as re pending DHC case InterDigital v. Xiaomi

In a matter brought by Xiaomi against InterDigital, a Chinese court just (September 23, 2020) issued an anti-suit injunction against InterDigital from pursuing matters pending in the Delhi High Court. InterDigital also stands to be fined up to one million yuan per day if it were to violate the order. InterDigital has filed an anti

Chinese Court issues anti-suit injunction as re pending DHC case InterDigital v. Xiaomi Read More »

China rules on adjusted royalty base for SEP licensing

Image First posted 2015 Earlier this month the Chinese Anti-trust authority (NDRC) gave its decision in the Qualcomm matter involving Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law (AML).  This decision is a landmark decision where Qualcomm was found to have engaged in anti-competitive conduct relating to the licensing of standard essential patents (“SEPs”) for wireless communication technology and baseband

China rules on adjusted royalty base for SEP licensing Read More »

India’s first Anti-Anti Suit Injunction (or A2SI) Order: A missed opportunity

First Posted May 2021 On 03 May, 2021, the Delhi High Court in InterDigital Corp & Ors. v Xiaomi Corp & Ors. issued its first and presumably first global A2SI InterDigital v Xiaomi DHC 03052021.pdf 1.47 MB  (this terminology was first introduced by Florian Mueller on his blog fosspatents.com here).  The judgment confirms its earlier order of 09.10.2020 in

India’s first Anti-Anti Suit Injunction (or A2SI) Order: A missed opportunity Read More »