Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
59,215
23,137


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.

iphone-5g-mmwave-16x9.jpg

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."

Article Link: Apple and Ericsson Reach Licensing Agreement to Settle Dispute Over Cellular Patents
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U

PauloSera

macrumors 6502a
Oct 12, 2022
509
671
Apple only pays later if Apple can't bankrupt the other company with lawyer fees and other costs.

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.
They're also now practically immune to class action lawsuits, which happens when they become this large. Scary thought actually. When holding a company accountable for their actions isn't practical or possible due to an unlimited reserve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Naraxus

Naraxus

macrumors 68000
Oct 13, 2016
1,716
7,338
Apples m. o.: Steal first, pay later.
Yup. They've done it their entire existance. They're a company built on the theft of others ip. From Xerox PARC to Steve Jobs's laughable claim that they "invented multitouch" (when in fact it was showcased years before the iPhone) but what else can you expect from a company whose unofficial motto is "Good artists copy, great artists steal."?
 

goobot

macrumors 603
Jun 26, 2009
6,345
3,830
long island NY
Yup. They've done it their entire existance. They're a company built on the theft of others ip. From Xerox PARC to Steve Jobs's laughable claim that they "invented multitouch" (when in fact it was showcased years before the iPhone) but what else can you expect from a company whose unofficial motto is "Good artists copy, great artists steal."?
Didn’t Apple buy the company that owned multitouch tho? I remember Apple got their hands on the patent somehow
 

Pezimak

macrumors 68000
May 1, 2021
1,896
1,689
If I recall, basically the iPhone uses Ericsson developed designed and built technology, without which the iPhone simply would not exist.
And when it came to renew its contract with Ericsson in 2015, Apple wanted to pay rock bottom pricing, so Ericsson said fine let's go to court, and literally almost outside the court doors they agreed a settlement, mainly because Apple knew full well they didn't have a leg to stand on. They were directly profiteering from Ericsson's inventions.

Looks like this was more of the same.

It's Apple doing business, but in a rather ridiculous way.
 

DeepIn2U

macrumors G4
May 30, 2002
11,944
6,159
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Typical outcome when big companies sue each other over patents
Sorry but Ericsson is in the right with their patents. They do still make networking equipment and prior to the smartphone era had a few patents as well that transferred into the smartphone era - such as proximity sensor when bringing the screen to your face would auto dim the screen as an example.

Glad Ericsson and Apple worked this out as it's fruitful for both and neither seemed to be livid with one another.
 

jz0309

macrumors 604
Sep 25, 2018
6,601
17,796
SoCal
Sorry but Ericsson is in the right with their patents. They do still make networking equipment and prior to the smartphone era had a few patents as well that transferred into the smartphone era - such as proximity sensor when bringing the screen to your face would auto dim the screen as an example.

Glad Ericsson and Apple worked this out as it's fruitful for both and neither seemed to be livid with one another.
I know that Ericsson has plenty patents in the network space, but, whenever companies of that size get in patent disputes - licensing agreements are the typical form of settlement, regardless of "wrong" or "right"
 

exoticSpice

Suspended
Jan 9, 2022
1,242
1,933
Yup. They've done it their entire existance. They're a company built on the theft of others ip. From Xerox PARC to Steve Jobs's laughable claim that they "invented multitouch" (when in fact it was showcased years before the iPhone) but what else can you expect from a company whose unofficial motto is "Good artists copy, great artists steal."?
Like Google or MS are any better. All tech companies suck. I like the tech but hate the comapnies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660

The Cappy

macrumors 6502a
Nov 9, 2015
603
1,073
Dunwich Fish Market
Waiting for the apple fan boys to blame this on Ericsson somehow
Meaning that you're trying to dodge criticism of your own highly partisan opinion by preemptively calling names. You've been studying the Putin theory of argument, I see. But I'll take your bait and give you a very realistic and non-partisan explanation for why you can't actually pin this entirely on one party, as you clearly want to.

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?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.