Court of Appeal upholds landmark Apple v Optis ruling
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Court of Appeal upholds landmark Apple v Optis ruling

AdobeStock_417477963 (1).jpeg

Implementers must agree in advance to pay what the court determines as FRAND, the England and Wales Court of Appeal has ruled

Technology manufacturers must accept a court-determined royalty for standard-essential patents or face an injunction, the England and Wales Court of Appeal ruled in Apple v Optis yesterday, October 27.

The judgment, written by Lord Justice Richard Arnold, was issued just over a week after the final hearing in the dispute. It affirmed High Court judge Richard Meade’s landmark decision in September 2021.

In a notable postscript to the judgment, Arnold bemoaned what he described as the “dysfunctional state” of SEP dispute resolution.

In the 2021 ruling, Meade told Apple it must agree to pay whatever terms the court later deemed fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) for a royalty to Optis’s SEP portfolio.

If Apple didn’t make that undertaking, it would be hit with a so-called FRAND injunctio that would bar the sales of infringing devices in the UK.

Apple committed to take a licence but later appealed against the judgment, on the grounds that implementers must be able to see the terms of a deal before they agreed to pay.

Optis filed its own cross-appeal, in which it argued that Meade’s proposed FRAND injunction was too generous to Apple.

Optis said Apple should be subject to an unqualified injunction, which would stop the smartphone maker from using the patented technology even after it had made the FRAND undertaking.

The Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals and instead endorsed Meade’s approach.

In his postscript, Arnold said each side had “adopted its position in an attempt to game the system in its favour”.

He added: “The only way to put a stop to such behaviour is for standard-development organisations like the European Telecommunications Standards Institute to make legally enforceable arbitration of such disputes part of their intellectual property rights policies.”

Optis was represented by EIP and Osborne Clarke. WilmerHale acted for Apple.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In-house lawyers reveal how they balance cost, quality, and other criteria to get the most from their relationships with external counsel
Dario Pietrantonio of Robic discusses growth opportunities for the firm and shares insights from his journey to managing director
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Law firms that pay close attention to their client relationships are more likely to win repeat work, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
The EMEA research period is open until May 31
Practitioners analyse a survey on how law firms prove value to their clients and reflect on why the concept can be hard to pin down
The winner of Managing IP’s Life Achievement Award discusses 50 years in IP law and how even he can’t avoid imposter syndrome
Saya Choudhary of Singh & Singh explains how her team navigated nine years of litigation to secure record damages of $29 million and the lessons learned along the way
The full list of finalists has been revealed and the winners will be presented on June 20 at the Metropolitan Club in New York
A team of IP and media law specialists has joined from SKW Schwarz alongside a former counsel at Sky
Gift this article