U.S. Pressures ICC to Limit Authority as Washington Threatens New Sanctions 
Supporters Gather Ahead of Verdict in Jimmy Lai’s Landmark Hong Kong National Security Trial 
Azul Airlines Wins Court Approval for $2 Billion Debt Restructuring and New Capital Raise 
Honduras Issues International Arrest Warrant for Ex-President Juan Orlando Hernández After U.S. Pardon 
Brazil Arrests Former Peruvian Foreign Minister Augusto Blacker Miller in International Fraud Case 
Colombia’s Clan del Golfo Peace Talks Signal Mandatory Prison Sentences for Top Leaders 
Bolsonaro’s Defense Requests Hospital Transfer and Humanitarian House Arrest 
Environmental Group Sues to Block Trump Image on U.S. National Park Passes 
Shell M&A Chief Exits After BP Takeover Proposal Rejected 
Trump Claims Pardon for Tina Peters Despite No Legal Authority 
Intel’s Testing of China-Linked Chipmaking Tools Raises U.S. National Security Concerns 
Judge Orders Return of Seized Evidence in Comey-Related Case, DOJ May Seek New Warrant 
FDA Says No Black Box Warning Planned for COVID-19 Vaccines Despite Safety Debate 
Air Force One Delivery Delayed to 2028 as Boeing Faces Rising Costs 
Woolworths Faces Fresh Class Action Over Alleged Underpayments, Shares Slide 
Bolivia Orders Pre-Trial Detention of Former President Luis Arce Over Embezzlement Probe 
California Jury Awards $40 Million in Johnson & Johnson Talc Cancer Lawsuit 
Apple has been ordered to pay $502 million to Texas-based Optis Cellular Technology LLC for using 4G-related patents in its iPhones and iPads, following a ruling by London’s Court of Appeal on Thursday. The decision marks the latest development in a years-long legal battle over standard-essential patents and fair licensing terms.
The dispute began in 2019 when Optis sued Apple in London, claiming the tech giant used its patents—essential to 4G wireless standards—without proper licensing. In 2023, London’s High Court initially awarded Optis $56.43 million plus interest for Apple’s past and future patent use. However, Optis challenged the amount, arguing it undervalued the global license Apple obtained.
In a partially redacted judgment, the appeals court sided with Optis, stating that Apple must pay a lump sum of $502 million, excluding interest, for the 2013–2027 licensing period. The ruling applies to a global license covering Optis’ portfolio of standard-essential patents.
An Apple spokesperson expressed disappointment and confirmed plans to appeal the decision. “Optis makes no products and their sole business is to sue companies using patents they buy,” the spokesperson said, accusing the company of seeking excessive compensation.
Optis, a non-practicing entity, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The case centers around the interpretation of FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms, which are supposed to govern licensing of essential technology patents.
The ruling could have broader implications for how multinational companies negotiate patent licenses and defend against litigation from firms that acquire patents solely for enforcement purposes. Apple has faced similar lawsuits globally, as regulators and courts continue to shape the boundaries of FRAND licensing in the tech industry.
