Category: Tesla v. InterDigital & Avanci
-
Right-sizing judicial FRAND determinations: one patent at a time? one country? worldwide? or even pools?
Courts can set FRAND rates, and they can form on opinion on whether a given party’s conduct was FRAND, but there are (and must be) important limitations. Litigation isn’t negotiation.
-
Is it a good idea for courts to determine patent pool rates even if a pool has already achieved market acceptance?
Before courts set patent pool rates, it bears reflecting on what that means if a pool’s terms already has been accepted by large parts of the market.
-
Pool rate-setting by courts: various questions left to be resolved in China after SPC ruling while Tesla appeals dismissal in UK
The recent decision by the Supreme People’s Court of China in tCL v. Access Advance on pool rate-setting is narrower than it appeared at first sight. Chinese courts tend to evaluate FRAND questions multifactorially.
-
London court heard jurisdictional challenges to Tesla’s pre-emptive 5G SEP strike against InterDigital and Avanci
Tesla’s pre-emptive strike FRAND action in the UK against InterDigital and Avanci may surmount the low hurdle of a jurisdictional challenge, but it should not.
-
Tesla tells UK court it has Avanci 4G license but wants preferential 5G rate, estimates Avanci’s coverage at 80%
In December 2023, Tesla brought a patent invalidation and declaratory judgment case against InterDigital that also involves FRAND claims against that patent holder as well as the entire Avanci pool.