Ericsson Extends Patent Lawsuit Against Apple to Europe

ipad_iphone_ios_8Ericsson has filed lawsuits against Apple in Germany, United Kingdom and the Netherlands after failing to reach a global licensing agreement with the company over both standard-essential and non-standardized patents.

Ericsson claims that Apple continues to sell the iPhone, iPad and other products that infringe upon its patented technologies, some related to 2G and 4G LTE standards, even though its licensing agreement expired in January.

Ericsson has been attempting to license its standard-essential patents with Apple on terms that are fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND), but the two companies have failed to reach an agreement following over two years of negotiations. Unable to resolve the situation outside of the courtroom, Ericsson has since filed patent lawsuits against the iPhone maker in the United States, and now Europe, for mediation by the courts.

"Apple continues to profit from Ericsson's technology without having a valid license in place," said Kasim Alfalahi, Chief Intellectual Property Officer at Ericsson. "Our technology is used in many features and functionality of today's communication devices. We are confident the courts in Germany, the UK and the Netherlands will be able to help us resolve this matter in a fair manner."

Ericsson, the world's largest provider of mobile network equipment, originally filed two complaints with the U.S. International Trade Commission and seven complaints with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Apple earlier this year. In late March, the ITC agreed to investigate the patent infringement claims, involving 41 wireless-related patents.

Apple originally filed suit against Ericsson in January, arguing that it was demanding excessive royalties for patents not essential to LTE standards. Ericsson, which holds over 35,000 patents, countersued in a Texas courtroom just hours later, seeking an estimated $250 million to $750 million in royalties per year for Apple to continue licensing its patented wireless technologies.

Popular Stories

maxresdefault

Apple Shows Off a Key Reason to Upgrade to the iPhone 17

Saturday February 7, 2026 9:26 am PST by
Apple today shared an ad that shows how the upgraded Center Stage front camera on the latest iPhones improves the process of taking a group selfie. "Watch how the new front facing camera on iPhone 17 Pro takes group selfies that automatically expand and rotate as more people come into frame," says Apple. While the ad is focused on the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, the regular iPhone...
Finder Siri Feature

Why Apple's iOS 26.4 Siri Upgrade Will Be Bigger Than Originally Promised

Friday February 6, 2026 3:06 pm PST by
In the iOS 26.4 update that's coming this spring, Apple will introduce a new version of Siri that's going to overhaul how we interact with the personal assistant and what it's able to do. The iOS 26.4 version of Siri won't work like ChatGPT or Claude, but it will rely on large language models (LLMs) and has been updated from the ground up. Upgraded Architecture The next-generation...
wwdc sans text feature

Apple Rumored to Announce New Product on February 19

Thursday February 5, 2026 12:22 pm PST by
Apple plans to announce the iPhone 17e on Thursday, February 19, according to Macwelt, the German equivalent of Macworld. The report, citing industry sources, is available in English on Macworld. Apple announced the iPhone 16e on Wednesday, February 19 last year, so the iPhone 17e would be unveiled exactly one year later if this rumor is accurate. It is quite uncommon for Apple to unveil...
apple wallet drivers license feature iPhone 15 pro

Apple Says These 7 U.S. States Plan to Offer iPhone Driver's Licenses

Monday February 9, 2026 6:24 am PST by
In select U.S. states, residents can add their driver's license or state ID to the Apple Wallet app on the iPhone and Apple Watch, and then use it to display proof of identity or age at select airports and businesses, and in select apps. The feature is currently available in 13 U.S. states and Puerto Rico, and it is expected to launch in at least seven more in the future. To set up the...
14 inch MacBook Pro Keyboard

New MacBook Pros Could Now Arrive in March

Sunday February 8, 2026 6:02 am PST by
New MacBook Pro models with the M5 Pro and M5 Max chips could arrive as soon as Monday, March 2, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In today's "Power On" newsletter, Gurman said that the release of new MacBook Pro models is tied to the release of macOS Tahoe 26.3. The launch is said to be slated for as early as the week of March 2. He added that the M4 Pro and M4 Max models on sale today...

Top Rated Comments

AngerDanger Avatar
141 months ago
This lawsuit is gaining multinational support faster than most of Apple's services.
Score: 23 Votes (Like | Disagree)
HobeSoundDarryl Avatar
140 months ago
They have 118,706 employees and do 6 billion in sales in a quarter. Does that sound like a patent troll?
I think you are not understanding the MR community definition of "patent troll." Here it's basically any company or individual with any patent that tries to use it against Apple. The definition can expand or morph to fit the general concept of anyone going against Apple is wrong (and no historical or other hard evidence can be accumulated to modify such opinions). Of course, when it's the other way- when it's Apple flexing their patent portfolio- it's all about "protecting IP" and similar.

From long-term observations, there appears to be 3 kinds of patents:
1. Apple patents are the ONLY bona-fide patents.
2. Patents used against Apple are only owned by patent trolls.
3. Patents that have no effect on Apple are fine unless Apple tries to get into something new against which such patents may lead to claims. Then, see #2.

...and these 2 overwhelming truths(?):
-Patent system is wonderful and "protecting IP" when it's working with Apple's objectives
-Patent system is "broken" and "needs reforms" when it's working against Apple's objectives

When it comes to actual legal actions, in a patent-driven clash where both parties are found to have infringed on the other party's patents,
-the party against Apple should "Die <party name/copycat> Die", while
-the judge is simply wrong about Apple infringing... or what Apple infringed upon should have never been awarded a patent at all.

Did I miss anything?

All ;)
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
iMacDragon Avatar
140 months ago
Actually, I wasn't joking. If I was joking, I would have said, "A badger, a nun, and a jar of marmalade walked into a bar..."

I think I've heard of Ericsson a long, long, long time ago. But now it just sounds like patent trolls.

They have 118,706 employees and do 6 billion in sales in a quarter. Does that sound like a patent troll?
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Steve121178 Avatar
141 months ago
Sounds fair to me. Apple either license them and pay the appropriate costs or get sued. Simple.
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)
BigInDallas Avatar
140 months ago
They have 118,706 employees and do 6 billion in sales in a quarter. Does that sound like a patent troll?

You have to remember that many people here will defend Apple at all costs. Hey its stealing, but since its Apple its OK:rolleyes:
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)
69Mustang Avatar
140 months ago
"Standards Essential" patents are treated specially. If my patent is incorporated into a standard that everyone must follow to inter operate, I fall under the FRAND clause - meaning I can charge a fair and reasonable fee that is non discriminatory and pretty much the same for every company- so they can all inter operate and participate in the standard. It's a trade off for making your patented technology the standard. So no, Ericcson can not just demand anything they want. Apple is within its legal bounds to argue that they should be charged about what everyone else using the standard is charged.

Nicely put. Except one glaring exception. Ericsson is asking for a FRAND rate for the patents; not more. They've also offered to have the courts decide the rate.

"Ericsson has been attempting to license its standard-essential patents with Apple on terms that are fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND)"

Apple doesn't want to pay FRAND rates. Apple wants to pay less.

Other than that tiny, little, minuscule exception you're right on point.

----------

The parties should have brought this to the courts a long time ago if they knew they weren't going to be able to reach an agreement. They could have also selected an arbitrator to set the price and then not taken up public court room time. But I guess they couldn't even agree on that sort of a process.

Ericsson offered the exact solution you're suggesting. Apple said no. The same answer they gave Nokia and Motorola in prior disputes.

----------

Who is Ericsson again? Are they a cell phone manufacturer, because I don't remember seeing anything they've done recently? Are they still a valid entity? Do they still have a pulse? Are they gerbils?

You should be embarrassed by your comment. Seriously, are you just joking?
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)