UPC CFI 87/2025

At the UPC: InterDigital Group (34 cases)·Disney Group (26 cases)

• 2026-07-24
  InfringementPublic

  Summary: The Dusseldorf Local Division held that the Disney defendants infringed EP 2 449 782 (process claim 5 and product claim 17) and ordered them to refrain from offering or placing on the market encoded picture data and bitstreams in eleven Contracting Member States, to recall and remove infringing products placed on the market since 6 December 2017, and to render information and accounts, on threat of penalty payments of up to EUR 10,000 per retrievable bitstream and EUR 5,000 per day. The counterclaim for revocation was dismissed and liability for damages was determined, while the request for an interim award of damages was dismissed. Costs were split 10/90 against the defendants, the value in dispute was set at EUR 8,000,000 for each action, and enforcement of the injunction, recall and removal was made conditional on the claimant providing EUR 8 million security. On FRAND, the Court held that where an NDA prevents submissions and the other party unjustifiably refuses to amend it, that is to the refusing party's detriment, and unexaminable steps of the negotiation programme are treated as compliant with Huawei v ZTE.

  Show the legal issues (9)

  • FRAND defence and the Huawei v ZTE negotiation framework
  • effect of an NDA preventing submissions where the other party refuses to amend it
  • unwilling licensee
  • injunctive relief, recall and removal under Art. 63 and 64 UPCA
  • information and rendering of accounts under R. 191 RoP
  • determination of liability for damages under Art. 68(1) UPCA
  • penalty payments under Art. 63(2) and 82(4) UPCA with R. 354.4 RoP
  • enforcement security under Art. 82(2) UPCA and R. 118.8 RoP
  • restriction of access to confidential information under R. 262A RoP
• 2025-11-19
  Public

  Summary: The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on InterDigital's application for a further round of written pleadings under R. 36 RoP against Disney entities in a video streaming patent case concerning EP 2 449 782.

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • R. 36 RoP further exchange of written pleadings
  • EPO opposition preliminary opinion as new evidence
  • Additional test purchases as new factual basis