Unwired Planet International Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.
High Court of Justice, Chancery Division
Case No. HP-2014-000005 (2017)
- Written by Eric Cervone, LLM
Facts
Unwired Planet International Ltd. (Unwired) (plaintiff) had a patent portfolio that included numerous patents declared essential to various telecommunications standards. Unwired’s business was in licensing those patents to companies that made and sold telecommunications equipment. The relevant governing body required that patents like Unwired’s be licensed on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) grounds. Unwired Planet sued Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Huawei) (defendant) for infringement of several of its patents. The parties disagreed on a number of issues, including the proper FRAND royalty rate. Both parties made offers regarding the licensing of Unwired’s patents. Both sides argued that their offers constituted FRAND terms. Unwired contended that it made offers of a license to Huawei on FRAND grounds. Unwired argued that if each side made a FRAND offer then the patentee’s offer should win. Unwired reasoned that by making a FRAND offer, a patentee discharges its obligations. Thus, Unwired claimed that if Huawei was unwilling to accept Unwired’s terms, the court should issue an injunction preventing Huawei from using Unwired’s patents. Huawei contended that if each side submitted a FRAND offer, then the implementer should win and the injunction should be refused. Huawei argued that the FRAND system was for the benefit of implementers in order to allow them access to the patented technology. The case was brought before the English High Court of justice.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Birss, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
