Apple and Ericsson Reach Licensing Agreement to Settle Dispute Over Cellular Patents
Ericsson today announced it has reached a patent license agreement with Apple that will settle a long-running dispute between the two companies over patents related to cellular technology.
The dispute dates back to early 2015 when the two companies sued each other over dozens of Ericsson patents related to cellular technology used in Apple products such as the iPhone and iPad.
The companies reached a seven-year patent licensing agreement in late 2015 that appeared to put an end to the dispute, but it was revived in late 2021 and early 2022 as the 2015 agreement neared its end and the companies were unable to agree on terms for extending the agreement and incorporating additional patents related to newer 5G technology.
With today's announcement, Ericsson and Apple have entered into a new multi-year agreement for cross-licensing cellular-related patents and additional patent rights.
Christina Petersson, Chief Intellectual Property Officer at Ericsson says: “We are pleased to settle the litigations with Apple with this agreement, which is of strategic importance to our 5G licensing program. This will allow both companies to continue to focus on bringing the best technology to the global market.”
In addition to the patent licensing, the agreement also includes commitments from both companies to strengthen their existing collaborations, "including in technology, interoperability and standards development."
Popular Stories
Apple released iOS 16.3 in late January following nearly six weeks of beta testing. The software update is available for the iPhone 8 and newer, and while it is a relatively minor update, it still includes a handful of new features, changes, and bug fixes.
Below, we've recapped new features in iOS 16.3, including support for physical security keys as a two-factor authentication option for...
Online retailer TigerDirect has slashed pricing on the M1 iPad Air in several colors, offering the base 64GB configuration for just $313.99 in Purple and Pink.
Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with TigerDirect. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.
That's a savings of 48% compared to Apple's normal $599.00...
Apple's next device with an Apple silicon chip may not be a Mac or an iPad, but rather an advanced external display, according to recent reports.
The display, which is rumored to arrive this year, is expected to sit somewhere between the $1,599 Studio Display and the $4,999 Pro Display XDR – but more exact information about the device's positioning and price point is as yet unknown. While ...
Apple has discussed selling a new top-of-the-line iPhone alongside the Pro and Pro Max models in 2024 at the earliest, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. Based on this timeframe, the device would be part of the iPhone 16 lineup or later.
In a September 2022 edition of his weekly "Power On" newsletter, Gurman said there was "potential" for an iPhone 15 Ultra to replace the iPhone 15 Pro...
Apple's VP of hardware engineering Matthew Costello and product marketing employee Alice Chan recently spoke with Men's Journal and TechCrunch about the new second-generation HomePod in wide-ranging interviews about the smart speaker.
Apple discontinued the original full-size HomePod in March 2021 after multiple reports indicated that sales of the speaker were lackluster, but Chan told Men's ...
Google's Chromium developers are working on an experimental web browser for iOS that would break Apple's browser engine restrictions, The Register reports.
The experimental browser, which is being actively pursued by developers, uses Google's Blink engine. Yet if Google attempted to release it on the App Store, it would not pass Apple's App Review process.
Apple's App Store rules dictate...
Apple appears to be preparing an iOS 16.3.1 update for the iPhone, based on evidence of the software in our website's analytics logs this week. It's unclear when the update will be released, but it will likely be available at some point in February.
The same logs have accurately foreshadowed the release of several previous updates, including iOS 16.0.3 and iOS 16.1.1 most recently, so they...
Today is the official launch day for the second-generation HomePod that was introduced in January, and we picked one up to compare it to the original HomePod that Apple discontinued in 2021.
Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Design wise, the second-generation HomePod looks a lot like the first-generation model, featuring the same rounded design and acoustic mesh...
Top Rated Comments
Apple's sitting on a pile of cash so they can afford to drag out cases for a long long time by appealing and counter suing.
Consider a situation where there are 2 parties. One has a thriving product, and the other used to have a thriving product but now mainly sells licenses to essential patents that are, because they're essential patents, supposed to be FRAND. But, taking advantage of the essential nature of those patents, the second party demands a price far in excess of what other essential patent holders ask for their licenses, and also more than it charges party 3, 4, and 5. Party 1 considers that a violation of FRAND. Party 1 says, "We're fully willing to pay a FRAND price, but party 2 is asking unreasonable and discriminatory fees." Both parties feel they're in the right. What will happen is that the two parties will litigate and eventually (hopefully) come to some quasi-amicable solution. Each party looks at the other and says, "I was fully ready to pay/license but the other guy's terms were outrageous." A reasonable person could look at this and imagine that Party 1 was probably asking a miser's price, and Party 2 was asking for an amount that was neither fair nor nondiscriminatory. But a really rabid fan-boy of party 2 or a really rabid troll hating party 1 will instead eagerly rush to say, "See? All party 1 ever does is steal!" And gosh. That was you. I'm sure you know exactly how much Ericsson asked initially, and how much the other essential patent holders were getting, though. Because you'd never just jump in like an idiot and start calling names before you actually knew all the facts. Would you?