Judge rules on FRAND in Motorola-Microsoft case

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Judge rules on FRAND in Motorola-Microsoft case

A US judge has issued a ruling on royalties in a dispute between Motorola and Microsoft, in the first decision on FRAND rates for standard-essential patents

On Thursday April 25, Judge James L Robart of the US District Court for the Western District of Washington ruled that Microsoft had to pay Motorola Mobility $1.8 million a year for the use of standard-essential patents relating to the H.264 video standard and the 802.11 wireless standard.

Microsoft used the technologies in its Xbox and Windows products.

Motorola had sought some $4 billion in royalties but Robart calculated that the FRAND rate for the H.264 patents should be .0555 cents per unit. The rate for the 802.11 patents should be 3.471 cents for each Xbox and 0.8 cents for other products

Patent owners and licensees in the computer and telecoms industries are engaged in numerous disputes over standard-essential patents, which have to be licensed on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms.

This is the first case to determine how FRAND royalty rates should be calculated. Other cases pending include a dispute between Apple and Motorola in the US, and one between IPCom and Nokia in the UK.

For more analysis, see Florian Mueller’s Foss Patents blog.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article