Supreme Court rules against Huawei in long-rolling Unwired Planet patent sueball: Take the licence terms we set or else

British courts can set global royalty rates for foreign firms

Huawei this morning lost a long-running patent lawsuit against Unwired Planet in a case that will determine global FRAND licensing rates for years to come – and also sets London as the jurisdiction of choice for squabbling telecoms multinationals.

In the judgment [PDF], the Supreme Court ruled that Huawei could not use standards-essential patents (SEPs) owned by Unwired Planet without agreeing a worldwide licence and royalties.

SEPs underpin common technologies such as LTE; to make a working mobile phone in today’s world, you will have to include patented technology that forms part of a mandatory global standard.

A concept called FRAND – Fair, Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory – sat at the heart of this case. SEPs must be offered on FRAND terms to so-called “implementers”, including handset makers such as Huawei, ZTE, Apple and Samsung.

In the case before the Supreme Court (which began years ago in the High Court) Huawei had wanted a UK-only deal with Unwired Planet for patents it intended to use. Unwired was only willing to strike a deal with Huawei for a worldwide FRAND licence – so the London courts were asked to decide the case by setting the licence terms.

Crucially, Unwired had previously granted favourable licence and royalty terms to Samsung for the same patents. Huawei argued that giving it different terms and conditions from Samsung would be a breach of Unwired’s FRAND commitments. Yet the court rejected the idea that the “most favourable licence” should become a binding FRAND-compliant licence for everyone wanting to use a particular patent.

“The court holds that as a result of the contractual arrangements in the ETSI [intellectual property rights] policy, the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction and may properly exercise a power, without the parties’ agreement, to grant an injunction to restrain infringement of a UK patent that is a standards-essential patent unless the implementer enters into a global licence of a multi national patent portfolio, and to determine the royalty rates and returns of that licence,” intoned Supreme Court judge Lord Hodge, delivering the court’s unanimous verdict, this morning.

Huawei lost on all five of its grounds of appeal, including an argument that courts in China were better placed to decide the case than London courts.

According to the judgement, Mark Howard QC, acting for Huawei, had earlier argued that English judges were "setting up the English jurisdiction as 'a de facto international or worldwide licensing tribunal for the telecommunications industry'. [And that] In so acting the English courts were out of step with the approach of other national courts."

The ruling has big implications for the international patent world but doesn’t necessarily make UK courts into global setters of patent law and policy, as Andrew Sharples of law firm EIP, which represented Unwired Planet and co-defendant Conversant Wireless Licensing, told The Reg.

“For too long large implementers have been able to hold out and avoid paying royalties on the technologies they are using, tying companies up in lengthy negotiations, litigations or both. Court has recognised that and seen the need to balance the right to access tech with need for patents to be properly compensated for using that tech,” he said.

Sharples added to The Register: “When we were beginning this case there were a number of people who didn’t think that a court would grant an injunction on the basis of an SEP because the owner of that SEP had to give an undertaking to make licences available for that patent on FRAND terms.”

A parallel and related case that formed part of today’s judgments, between Conversant Wireless Licensing and Chinese firm ZTE, is set for further hearings in January.

Related patent lawsuits in America also concerned Unwired Planet's 4G patents, for which it scored $506.2m in FRAND royalties on LTE capability in the iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch. The firm was once known as Openwave Systems. ®

Similar topics

Other stories you might like

  • Prisons transcribe private phone calls with inmates using speech-to-text AI

    Plus: A drug designed by machine learning algorithms to treat liver disease reaches human clinical trials and more

    In brief Prisons around the US are installing AI speech-to-text models to automatically transcribe conversations with inmates during their phone calls.

    A series of contracts and emails from eight different states revealed how Verus, an AI application developed by LEO Technologies and based on a speech-to-text system offered by Amazon, was used to eavesdrop on prisoners’ phone calls.

    In a sales pitch, LEO’s CEO James Sexton told officials working for a jail in Cook County, Illinois, that one of its customers in Calhoun County, Alabama, uses the software to protect prisons from getting sued, according to an investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

    Continue reading
  • Battlefield 2042: Please don't be the death knell of the franchise, please don't be the death knell of the franchise

    Another terrible launch, but DICE is already working on improvements

    The RPG Greetings, traveller, and welcome back to The Register Plays Games, our monthly gaming column. Since the last edition on New World, we hit level cap and the "endgame". Around this time, item duping exploits became rife and every attempt Amazon Games made to fix it just broke something else. The post-level 60 "watermark" system for gear drops is also infuriating and tedious, but not something we were able to address in the column. So bear these things in mind if you were ever tempted. On that note, it's time to look at another newly released shit show – Battlefield 2042.

    I wanted to love Battlefield 2042, I really did. After the bum note of the first-person shooter (FPS) franchise's return to Second World War theatres with Battlefield V (2018), I stupidly assumed the next entry from EA-owned Swedish developer DICE would be a return to form. I was wrong.

    The multiplayer military FPS market is dominated by two forces: Activision's Call of Duty (COD) series and EA's Battlefield. Fans of each franchise are loyal to the point of zealotry with little crossover between player bases. Here's where I stand: COD jumped the shark with Modern Warfare 2 in 2009. It's flip-flopped from WW2 to present-day combat and back again, tried sci-fi, and even the Battle Royale trend with the free-to-play Call of Duty: Warzone (2020), which has been thoroughly ruined by hackers and developer inaction.

    Continue reading
  • American diplomats' iPhones reportedly compromised by NSO Group intrusion software

    Reuters claims nine State Department employees outside the US had their devices hacked

    The Apple iPhones of at least nine US State Department officials were compromised by an unidentified entity using NSO Group's Pegasus spyware, according to a report published Friday by Reuters.

    NSO Group in an email to The Register said it has blocked an unnamed customers' access to its system upon receiving an inquiry about the incident but has yet to confirm whether its software was involved.

    "Once the inquiry was received, and before any investigation under our compliance policy, we have decided to immediately terminate relevant customers’ access to the system, due to the severity of the allegations," an NSO spokesperson told The Register in an email. "To this point, we haven’t received any information nor the phone numbers, nor any indication that NSO’s tools were used in this case."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021