Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v. Lava International Ltd.
Whether patents said to be essential to telecommunications standards were valid and infringed, and how compensation should be worked out.
What the court held
After a full trial the Court upheld the asserted patents, accepted that they were essential to the standards relied on, and found that they had been infringed. The validity attacks, including those based on the statutory exclusions, were rejected. On remedies the Court awarded damages worked out as a royalty applied to the relevant turnover of the implementer, and it took account of the parties' conduct across years of licence discussions in concluding that the implementer had not behaved as a willing licensee.
Why it matters to a reader of this provision
This is India's first judgment on telecommunications standard essential patents delivered after a complete trial, so it shows how the ordinary law of rights, validity and remedies is applied to standards based technology. Anyone reading about reliefs will find a worked example of an Indian court calculating a royalty, rather than only granting or refusing an injunction and leaving money to be sorted out later.
Provisions this judgment interprets
Open a provision for the plain-language explanation, the worked example and the forms and deadlines it touches.
Does this judgment affect your matter?
Whether a decision helps or hurts depends entirely on your facts and your claims. A patent professional can tell you which.