Can UK courts reshape global tech licensing? A London ruling grants Acer, Asus and Hisense an interim patent licence in a high-stakes dispute with Nokia.
 |
| The High Court’s interim licence decision shows how English courts are increasingly shaping global patent royalties and tech industry negotiations. Image: CH |
LONDON, United Kingdom — December 19, 2025:
A ruling by London’s High Court in favor of Acer, Asus and Hisense against Nokia has reinforced the United Kingdom’s emerging role as a central arena for resolving global patent licensing disputes, particularly those involving standard-essential technologies underpinning video streaming and modern connected devices.
By granting the three companies an interim licence, the court has ensured they can continue selling products while the final “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) terms of Nokia’s patent licence are litigated. The decision reflects a pragmatic judicial approach aimed at preventing prolonged legal stand-offs from disrupting international supply chains and consumer markets.
Judge James Mellor set a provisional royalty rate of $0.365 per device—significantly higher than the $0.03 per unit proposed by Acer and Asus, but well below the $0.69 sought by Nokia. The figure signals judicial skepticism toward both extremes and highlights the court’s growing willingness to act as an economic arbiter in complex technology disputes.
The case underscores a broader structural tension in the tech industry. Companies like Nokia, which hold extensive portfolios of standard-essential patents, depend on licensing income to fund research and development. Manufacturers, however, argue that excessive royalties undermine the principle that technical standards should be widely accessible and competitively neutral.
English courts have increasingly positioned themselves as referees in this debate. Following a landmark 2020 UK Supreme Court ruling, they can set global FRAND licensing terms—authority that once belonged almost exclusively to private negotiations. China’s courts have asserted similar powers, creating parallel hubs for resolving international patent conflicts and intensifying forum competition.
Recent precedents illustrate the trend. Interim licences have been granted in disputes involving Amazon and Nokia, Lenovo and Ericsson, and Samsung and ZTE, even if some rulings have later been overturned on appeal. Together, these cases signal judicial impatience with parties that use delay as leverage in licensing talks.
For Nokia, the stakes extend beyond a single dispute. The company has indicated it may appeal, potentially to the UK Supreme Court, challenging the legal foundations that allow English courts to impose worldwide FRAND terms. Such a move could have far-reaching implications for how patent holders enforce their rights and where global companies choose to litigate.
The ruling also highlights the increasingly fragmented nature of patent enforcement. Nokia is simultaneously pursuing related lawsuits in the United States and Europe, even as it has settled similar claims with Amazon. That patchwork approach reflects both the high value of video streaming patents and the growing resistance among device makers to expansive licensing demands.
Ultimately, the decision is a reminder that courts are no longer passive backstops in technology disputes. As streaming and connected devices become more central to the global economy, judges—particularly in London—are playing a decisive role in shaping how innovation is priced, how standards are shared, and how power is balanced between patent holders and product makers worldwide.