Apple’s long-running patent dispute with Optis is set to enter a new chapter this week, as the case reaches the UK Supreme Court. Here are the details.
Apple and Optis back in court
Since 2019, Apple and Texas-based Optis Wireless have been locked in disputes over patents covering several 4G/LTE networking technologies.
In separate US and UK proceedings, Optis alleges that iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watch models with LTE support infringe on its patents.
Over the years, Apple and Optis traded wins and losses through a seemingly endless series of appeals. Most recently, a US jury sided with Apple after earlier trials resulted in awards of $506 million and then $300 million, both of which were ultimately overturned.
In February, Apple was cleared of infringing all five patents at issue, but Optis told 9to5Mac that the company looked forward “to a further review of the jury’s verdict by the U.S. District Court and Federal Circuit,” meaning the case may not be over just yet.
As for the battle being fought across the pond, the Financial Times reports that Apple is now asking the UK Supreme Court to overturn a ruling requiring it to pay Optis $502 million for a global patent license.
Rather than centering on whether Apple infringed on Optis’ patents, the case now centers on how much Apple should pay to use the patented technology under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory, or FRAND, terms.
From the report:
In 2023 the High Court in London ruled that Apple had to pay $56mn to Optis, but the Court of Appeal last year increased the iPhone maker’s bill ninefold to $502mn.
The Court of Appeal arrived at the figure in part by using a deal that Optis struck with Google as a baseline. The judges’ calculation also included royalties going back to 2013, whereas the High Court said a six-year limit should apply.
For this reason, Apple is asking the UK Supreme Court to review the amount and methodology, arguing that the Court of Appeal “erred in law” and that its valuation approach was “arbitrary,” according to the FT.
Optis, meanwhile, says Apple has repeatedly sought to avoid paying fair royalties and used its market power to push licensing rates lower. The report notes that Qualcomm is also opposing Apple’s appeal, arguing that the company’s position departs from widely accepted licensing principles and could weaken incentives to develop new technologies.
The Supreme Court’s panel of five judges is scheduled to hear the case over three days.
For The FT’s full report, follow this link.
Worth checking out on Amazon
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
