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 has announced it will be holding a special event on Tuesday, May 7 at 7 a.m. Pacific Time (10 a.m. Eastern Time), with a live stream to be available on Apple.com and on YouTube as usual. The event invitation has a tagline of "Let Loose" and shows an artistic render of an Apple Pencil, suggesting that iPads will be a focus of the event. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more ...
Apple today released several open source large language models (LLMs) that are designed to run on-device rather than through cloud servers. Called OpenELM (Open-source Efficient Language Models), the LLMs are available on the Hugging Face Hub, a community for sharing AI code. As outlined in a white paper [PDF], there are eight total OpenELM models, four of which were pre-trained using the...
Apple has dropped the number of Vision Pro units that it plans to ship in 2024, going from an expected 700 to 800k units to just 400k to 450k units, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Orders have been scaled back before the Vision Pro has launched in markets outside of the United States, which Kuo says is a sign that demand in the U.S. has "fallen sharply beyond expectations." As a...
Apple is finally planning a Calculator app for the iPad, over 14 years after launching the device, according to a source familiar with the matter. iPadOS 18 will include a built-in Calculator app for all iPad models that are compatible with the software update, which is expected to be unveiled during the opening keynote of Apple's annual developers conference WWDC on June 10. AppleInsider...
Apple is set to unveil iOS 18 during its WWDC keynote on June 10, so the software update is a little over six weeks away from being announced. Below, we recap rumored features and changes planned for the iPhone with iOS 18. iOS 18 will reportedly be the "biggest" update in the iPhone's history, with new ChatGPT-inspired generative AI features, a more customizable Home Screen, and much more....
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?