Context: Nokia is enforcing video patents, which largely are not subject to the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) licensing pledge, against video streamers Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD; November 1, 2025 ip fray article) and Paramount. The former wants to sell itself to Netflix (December 5, 2025 ip fray article), while the latter has made an alternative offer. Both media companies brought FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing) actions against Nokia in the UK, which the High Court of Justice for England & Wales (EWHC) practically treats as a single consolidated action (December 1, 2025 ip fray article).
What’s new: In January 15, 2026, Mr Justice Richard Meade decided on the streamers’ motion to expedite their combined case. The decision has now been published. Nokia was not opposed to a trial in the so-called Michaelmas term, which starts in early October and lasts until a few days before Christmas, but proposed to wait until at least November 23, 2026, which the streamers opposed. Mr Justice Meade left the exact date to court-internal logistics, but in principle agreed with the streamers that their case should be heard and decided at the earliest opportunity.
Direct impact:
- In an apparent effort to navigate around comity issues, the decision notes that foreign courts may or may not be influenced by the outcome of the UK FRAND (or, in ITU terminlogy, RAND, though the omission of the F makes no difference) trial, but discusses the possibility that there could be an impact.
- Counterintuitively, the UK trial will relate not only to standard-essential patents (SEPs) that are undisputedly subject to the ITU FRAND pledge, but also to encoding patents (for which this is disputed) and non-essential patents, which are not subject to a FRAND pledge by any stretch of the imagination. The UK court considers this resaonable only because Nokia offered arbitration to the streamers that would result in a license to all three categories of patents.
Wider ramifications:
- Unlke the EWHC, continental European and Brazilian courts will not be prepared to enter into an inter-jurisdictional race. Given the current friction between the English courts on the one hand and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and German national courts on the other hand, ip fray predicts that whatever rate is determined in the UK will not sway UPC and German decisions on the availability of injunctive relief. The question is only whether those courts will dignify the UK outcome with any comments or brush it aside as non-binding without any comment on its substance (the latter is more likely than the former).
- Even though it appears that Nokia does not want to engage in a cross-jurisdictional antisuit battle if it can be avoided, there still are procedural options for Nokia to set the stage for a settlement ahead of the (costly) UK trial. For example, the Munich I Regional Court could easily grant a preliminary injunction (PI), even over SEPs if necessary, in a matter of months (January 26, 2026 ip fray article). And in Brazil, even merits-based PIs (which are hard to get lifted) typically take only about six months.
The decision to expedite the consolidated matter to the greatest extent possible is based primarily on the fact that Nokia, through its enforcement actions seeking injunctive relief in other jurisdictions, has created a sense of urgency on the streamers’ part. Also, while Nokia has settled its video patent dispute with Hisense (January 8, 2026 ip fray article), the cases against Acer and ASUS may still go to trial in the UK in the summer. Mr Justice Meade notes that Nokia will, therefore, have to address certain licensing issues already ahead of the WBD/Paramount trial. But Acer and ASUS are computer makers while WBD and Paramount are streaming giants. Presumably the licensing issues in those cases are disparate even if there is an overlap concerning certain patents.
The decision discusses hypothetical timelines in continental European courts. For example, it talks about a scenario in which the UPC would not hold its hearing before the first quarter of 2027 and would then not give judgment immediately. UPC decisions typically take a month or more after a hearing. But the UPC is disinclined to attach weight to any UK FRAND decisions.
For Brazil, the UK decision mentions a potential injunction against Paramount in the third quarter of 2026. That would definitely be before the envisioned UK FRAND trial.
In Germany, WBD could be enjoined “between October and February” and Paramount in October or November. The UK decision says there is “a slightly greater question-mark over the German date because of re-arrangement of judicial personnel in those courts.” However, ip fray does not expect the Munich I Regional Court to be slowed down. Today, the 21st Civil Chamber’s new Presiding Judge Dr. Hubertus Schacht took over (January 16, 2026 ip fray article).
The UK order correctly notes that the Munich court doesn’t always rule from the bench, but recently that has happened quite often, and even if not, a decision would come down just a couple of weeks after a trial.
All in all, it appears most likely that those disputes will be settled ahead of the envisioned UK trial date.
Counsel
Counsel for WBD: Andrew Lykardiopoulos KC and Femi Adekoya, instructed by Taylor Wessing.
Counsel for Paramount: Ravi Metha and Kyra Nezami, instructed by Kirkland & Ellis.
Counsel for Nokia: Nicholas Saunders KC and Thomas Jones, instructed by Bird & Bird.