In the last strange turn of the patent infringement battle between Apple Y ericssonthe Cupertino company has responded to the iPhone prohibition in Colombia alleging that their human rights have been violated.
The company requested emergency aid in Colombia just days after a US judge warned it not to abuse the judicial system there by filing emergency requests for non-emergencies…
Background
The executive summary is that 5G iPhone and iPad use proprietary technology owned by Ericsson. Apple has been licensing this technology, but is not happy with the amount it is being charged for that license, so it has stopped paying.
This means that the company is currently infringing on Ericsson’s patents, and the Swedish company is seeking iPhone bans in various countries, i.e. injunctions against the import and sale of 5G iPhones and iPads.
Ericsson managed to get hold of the first of these, in Colombia. The court ordered all iPhone sales in the country to cease and required Apple to make sure its resellers were aware of the ban.
Apple responded by filing an emergency motion in the Eastern District of Texas in an attempt to obtain damages from Ericsson for its losses in Colombia. It is also filing several counterclaims against Ericsson.
If you want to understand the background in more detail, here we summarize it.
Judge warns Apple not to abuse legal proceedings
What Foss Patents reported, the Texas judge denied Apple’s motion, but also admonished the company for misusing the emergency motion process for a non-emergency matter.
Judge Gilstrap does not believe that it constitutes “imminent and irreparable harm” to Apple that, as a result of enforcement actions in other jurisdictions, it has to sit down and negotiate a license with Ericsson. The Texas FRAND case will go to trial in December, and by September, Apple and Ericsson have to participate in formal mediation. […]
There is also a procedural problem. Apple should have filed a regular motion instead of a emergency movement. “Emergency motions should be filed only in truly extenuating circumstances and should not be used as a means to secure an expedited information program and hearing before the Court,” Judge Gilstrap clarifies, and “finds that Apple has misused and misapplied the rules for emergencies. practice of the motion in this Court”.
The judge told Apple’s lawyers that if they did the same thing again, he wouldn’t be amused.
“In addition, such conduct will warrant, and likely result in, sanctions against [Apple].”
iPhone ban is a violation of human rights, says Apple
Undeterred by a warning from a US judge for misuse of judicial procedures, Apple has taken a truly extraordinary step back in Colombia. Foss Patents again:
Apple leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to get Ericsson’s Colombian iPhone/iPad injunction lifted over a 5G standard essential patent (SEP), and now accuses Ericsson, its lawyers and the court that ordered the precautionary measure of violating basic human rights. invoking even art. 8 of the famous Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I wonder what’s next: voting rights for iPhones?
Apple is seeking emergency help against all parties involved.
- ericsson
- Your Colombian law firm (OlarteMoure)
- Carlos R. Olarte (name partner of that firm and lead counsel for Ericsson)
- The Civil Court No. 43 of the Bogotá Circuit
Article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says:
Every person has the right to an effective remedy before the competent national courts for acts that violate the fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or the law.
Patent expert Florian Mueller isn’t impressed by Apple’s theory that this applies in this case.
Obviously, this does not mean that every time you disagree with a judge, this article applies […]
No one has left an Apple executive naked in Colombia, or taken a blood sample without permission. By extension, art. 8 UDHR “also covers your right to develop your personal identity and to form friendships and other relationships. This includes the right to participate in essential economic, social, cultural and leisure activities.” (emphasis added)
The unlicensed use of patents, however, is not exactly an “essential economic activity” protected by art. 8.
Apple is particularly upset that Ericsson’s lawyers are writing to Apple resellers, making sure they’re aware of the ban on selling iPhones, which Mueller says is quite an interesting objection given that Apple’s lawyers did exactly the same in a patent dispute with Samsung.
The 9to5Mac Take
The iPhone maker doesn’t dispute any of the facts. He acknowledges that he uses Ericsson’s proprietary technology and admits that he did not renew his license and is therefore currently in breach of the patent. He seems to be hoping he can apply enough legal pressure to force Ericsson to accept a lower payment, while the Swedish company is doing the same in reverse by seeking to ban the iPhone.
The bottom line here is that both companies are vulnerable. Ericsson, because at the same time cutting off its revenue streams from product sales and patent royalties leaves it in a financially precarious position. Apple, because the financial consequences of iPhone sales bans in major markets put huge sums of money at risk.
One would think that both companies would see the point in settling the dispute in a meeting room, rather than in a series of courts around the world, but so far there are no signs of commitment from either side.
Photo: patrick grubán/CC BY-SA 2.0
FTC: We use automatic affiliate links that generate income. Plus.
