Apple Ordered to Pay $85 Million in Royalties to WiLan in Patent Infringement Case - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Apple Ordered to Pay $85 Million in Royalties to WiLan in Patent Infringement Case

Apple must pay $85 million in royalties to Canadian patent holding company WiLan for infringing patents related to wireless communications, a jury in San Diego has ruled (via Bloomberg).

wilan logo
The two patents relate to making phone calls while simultaneously downloading data. In August 2018, a different jury said Apple infringed the patents and awarded WiLan $145 million, but a retrial was ordered to reconsider the damages.

At the previous retrial in January 2019, the court agreed that Apple had infringed on the patents. However, U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw accepted Apple's argument that the method WiLan had used to calculate the appropriate royalty rate was flawed.

Sabraw urged the Quarterhill company to accept reduced damages of $10 million or prepare for another trial to figure out how much Apple needed to pay. WiLan chose another trial.

WiLan came to the latest royalty figure of $85 million based on iPhone sales. Apple unsuccessfully argued in court papers that the Ottawa-based holding company hadn't provided enough evidence to help the jury determine it was entitled to anything.

WiLan describes itself as "one of the most successful patent licensing companies in the world." Apple's legal dispute with WiLan started back in 2010, when WiLan claimed Apple violated one of its Bluetooth related products.

Popular Stories

iphone 12 5g

Apple's $502M Optis Patent Case Heads to UK Supreme Court

Tuesday June 30, 2026 7:45 am PDT by
Apple will try to convince the UK Supreme Court this week to throw out a $502 million judgment in favor of patent holder Optis Wireless. As reported in the Financial Times, the UK Supreme Court this week takes up a dispute that has stretched on since 2019 in both U.S. and UK courts, when Optis first accused iPhones, iPads, and LTE-equipped Apple Watch models of infringing patents covering 4G ...
iCloud iPhone 17 Pro

iPhone Users Who Pay for iCloud Storage Get Two New Perks on iOS 27

Thursday July 2, 2026 6:10 am PDT by
If you pay for certain iCloud+ storage plans beyond the 5GB that Apple offers for free, you will receive two more perks on iOS 27 at no additional cost. A summary of the two new iCloud+ perks on iOS 27:Increased daily usage limits for some new Apple Intelligence features, including image generation in the revamped Image Playground app. HomeKit Secure Video cameras receive generated video...
iPhone 4 on Black Feature

Apple Facing One of Its Worst Leaks Since the iPhone 4

Thursday July 2, 2026 9:53 am PDT by
Apple supplier Tata Electronics recently suffered a cyberattack that resulted in thousands of confidential files being published on the dark web, and this reportedly included some photos and documents related to the upcoming iPhone 18 Pro. We have elected not to share any of the leaked photos in this story due to the illegal nature in which they were obtained, but they can easily be found...

Top Rated Comments

Zachari Avatar
84 months ago
Patent trolls need to die.
Score: 29 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago
Making phone calls while simultaneously downloading data...because the rest of the world didn't think about that idea.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago
...

At the January 2019 retrial, the court agreed ('https://www.macrumors.com/2019/01/07/wilan-apple-dispute-damages-award-lowered/') that Apple had infringed on the patents. However, U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw accepted Apple's argument that the method WiLan had used to calculate the appropriate royalty rate was flawed.

...
A couple corrections...

The retrial was in January 2020, not in January 2019. Judge Sabraw's decision, finding (effectively) for Apple on its motion for a new trial on damages and against Apple on its motion for judgment as a matter of law, came in January 2019.

Also, the court - i.e. Judge Sabraw - didn't agree that Apple had infringed the patents at issue. Rather, she denied Apple's motion for judgment as a matter of law. In other words, she found that Apple's legal and evidentiary arguments weren't sufficient to warrant overturning the jury's finding with regard to infringement. That's quite different from the court agreeing with the jury that Apple had infringed.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Kabeyun Avatar
84 months ago

WiLan describes itself as "one of the most successful patent licensing companies in the world."
In my dream world, there’s no such thing as a patent licensing company.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
spyguy10709 Avatar
84 months ago
"In 2006, WiLAN changed their business model. Instead of focusing on research and development and trying to commercialize its patent technology, WiLAN divested its various technology product lines to refocus its business on licensing intellectual property and patent rights."

Trolls.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
84 months ago

suprising apple didn't move to invalidate the patent. it sounds painfully obvious as most patents are.
i can’t stress this enough, that’s not how patents work. You cannot patent an idea.


Making phone calls while simultaneously downloading data...because the rest of the world didn't think about that idea.
everyone had the idea maybe, but they had the method for actually achieving that idea. That’s what was patented and, apparently, Apple copied that.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)