Exclusive: Dolby-backed Opus pool reveals royalty demands

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Exclusive: Dolby-backed Opus pool reveals royalty demands

AdobeStock_482647355 (1).jpeg

The Vectis IP pool will charge €15c per unit for access to patents covering the Opus audio technology standard

Licensing firm Vectis IP, backed by Dolby and research group Fraunhofer, launched a new patent pool for the Opus audio technology standard today, January 16.

The pool licence offers access to more than 300 patents owned by Dolby and Fraunhofer at a rate of €15c ($16c) per unit with an annual cap of €15 million.

Licensees who sign up before October this year will pay a lower rate of €10c per unit, subject to an annual cap of €10 million.

The pool will not seek any royalties from licensees who sign up before October for any historic use of the standard.

The royalties charged to licensees who sign up after October will date to January 1, 2023.

The Opus standard was developed by programmers at Skype, Mozilla, and the Xiph.Org Foundation.

These organisations made a commitment to license the tech on an open-access, royalty-free basis.

None of Vectis, Dolby, or Fraunhofer were part of the standardisation process for Opus, which was carried out by the Internet Engineering Task Force.

Giustino de Sanctis, CEO of Vectis IP, told Managing IP that the original Opus developers’ royalty-free commitment didn’t cover all of the patents essential to the standard.

De Sanctis said the pool would target licensees involved in the manufacture of tablets, PCs, and smartphones.

Asked whether implementers would react negatively to being asked to pay for access to Opus technology, he said Vectis would work to educate the market.

“If the market has a certain expectation, you have to face that expectation.”

He acknowledged a comparison with the auto industry, which initially resisted pressure to license cellular patents.

“Automakers never thought this was a problem.

“It will be part of our job to go out there and explain this reality,” he said.

De Sanctis said the pool had been involved in discussions with potential licensors since an original call for patents last September.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Three sources explain why a notification by Nanjing’s IP centre in China banning AI use in patent drafting is too broad and could be difficult to enforce
Sheppard Mullin’s latest hires explain why the firm's industry expertise impressed them
Elizabeth Godfrey explains why she doesn’t believe in a ‘salesperson’ approach to BD, and reveals how AI is playing an important role at Davies Collison Cave
Partner moves data from April and May showed the firm boosted its presence in California, while another firm expanded in Atlanta
Angela Oliver shares tips for preparing oral arguments, and reveals her passion for marine biology
The Getty Images v Stability AI case, which will hear untested points of law, is a reminder of the importance of the legal system and the excitement it can generate
Firms explain the IP concerns that can arise amid attempts by brands to show off their ‘Canadianness’ to consumers
Counsel say they will be monitoring issues such as the placement of house marks, and how Mondelēz demonstrates a likelihood of confusion in its dispute with Aldi
The EUIPO expanding its mediation services and a new Riyadh office for Simmons & Simmons were also among the top talking points this week
David Boundy explains why Pierson Ferdinand provides a platform that will allow him to use administrative law to address IP concerns
Gift this article