Apple's $502M Optis Patent Case Heads to UK Supreme Court - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

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

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.

iphone 12 5g
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 networking technology.

The current UK fight is no longer about whether Apple infringed the patents, but rather what Apple should reasonably owe for using it. Patents deemed essential to a wireless standard must be licensed on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, and the two sides remain far apart on the number. The award is structured as a single upfront payment spanning 2013 to 2027, covering Optis' LTE patents across Apple's cellular hardware.

The figure has shifted dramatically over the course of the proceedings. London's High Court had set the bill at $56.43 million in 2023. The Court of Appeal multiplied that roughly ninefold to $502 million last year. To get to that figure, the judges leaned on a separate agreement Optis had signed with Google as a reference point and counted royalties stretching back to 2013, well beyond the six-year window the High Court had favored.

Apple wants the justices to reconsider not just the size of the award but how the lower court arrived at it, contending the Court of Appeal "erred in law" and produced a figure it calls "arbitrary." Optis counters that Apple has spent years dodging fair payment and using its scale to drive rates down. Qualcomm has also lined up against the appeal, warning that Apple's stance breaks with established licensing norms and risks discouraging future innovation.

The dispute traces back to a pivotal 2020 ruling in which the UK Supreme Court held that British courts can set worldwide patent licensing rates, even though they can only rule on the infringement of UK patents. That decision opened the door for Optis to pursue global damages. After a 2021 High Court finding that Apple had infringed two of its patents, with the potential bill reported to run as high as $7 billion, an Apple lawyer told the court the company could withdraw from the UK rather than accept terms it considered "commercially unacceptable." Apple later backed away from that position.

The proceedings in the UK contrast with the parallel U.S. case, where Apple has fared considerably better. In February, a U.S. jury cleared Apple of infringing any of the five patents in dispute, the latest turn in a case that has repeatedly ended in Apple's favor.

Two earlier awards, of $506 million and $300 million, were each thrown out on appeal. Optis has signaled the U.S. legal battle isn't finished, saying it expects the District Court and the Federal Circuit to revisit the verdict.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

kidsoniphonedigitalwellnesspetition

UK to Ban Social Media for Under-16s Starting in 2027

Monday June 15, 2026 2:09 am PDT by
The British government will introduce a ban on social media access for all users under 16 years of age, set to take effect in 2027. UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced the plans on Monday, calling the move "the right step for Britain" and the best way to keep children safe online. "This is not something I do lightly, and I will not present it as cost-free, as if social media has [brought ...
iCloud General Feature Redux

UK iCloud Users Could Claim £77 Each as Apple Case Heads to Trial

Tuesday June 23, 2026 1:49 am PDT by
A class action lawsuit accusing Apple of overcharging U.K. iCloud users has been certified to go ahead, putting the £3 billion ($3.9 billion) claim on track for a trial in October 2028. According to BBC News, the Competition Appeal Tribunal cleared consumer group Which? to bring the case on behalf of an estimated 40 million U.K. iPhone and iPad owners, each of whom could receive up to £77...
app store blue banner uk fixed

UK Pushes Apple to Loosen App Store Payment and NFC Rules

Tuesday June 30, 2026 3:00 am PDT by
The U.K.'s competition regulator has proposed letting app developers direct users to payment options outside Apple's App Store and Google's Play Store, in a move aimed at increasing competition and reducing the fees charged by the two companies. As reported by Reuters, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said the proposals would remove restrictions that currently prevent U.K....

Top Rated Comments

sw1tcher Avatar
3 days ago at 07:55 am

The current UK fight is no longer about whether Apple infringed the patents, but rather what Apple should reasonably owe for using it. Patents deemed essential to a wireless standard must be licensed on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, and the two sides remain far apart on the number.
Apple Optis Wireless created the App Store 4G networking technology. It's their IP. Therefore, they should be able to charge app developers Apple whatever they deem to be fair and reasonable for using it. If they don't like it, they should have created their own App Store 4G networking technology.

Did I get that right? 😂
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
3 days ago at 08:14 am

Apple Optis Wireless created the App Store 4G networking technology. It's their IP. Therefore, they should be able to charge app developers Apple whatever they deem to be fair and reasonable for using it. If they don't like it, they should have created their own App Store 4G networking technology.

Did I get that right? 😂
You really did, it is a good analogy.

Which is why patents are often kind of messy anyway, sometimes there's only so many ways something can be done. And once something has been started a certain way, there's little practical reason to do it a different way just for the sake of doing something nobody else has already claimed.

And with that natural monopoly we agree must come some responsibility. But of course the people in control of it do everything they can to use it to their maximum advantage.

And it's a great joke because you rarely see people defending the Qualcomms of the world when they do unreasonable things, but people come out of the woodwork to defend Apple doing the same things.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
I7guy Avatar
3 days ago at 10:53 am

It’s good to know that Apple is not being fair with the app store policies and practices. So it is now up to regulators to make them fair.
Being “fair” is not a thing. Apple has an integrated ecosystem. They built the software and hardware. One can buy into the ecosystem or not.

Did the DMA level the playing field? Why not? It’s lousy knee jerk legislation that gives apples intellectual property away for nothing.

To make Apple fair. Vote with your $$$.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
I7guy Avatar
3 days ago at 09:39 am

Apple Optis Wireless created the App Store 4G networking technology. It's their IP. Therefore, they should be able to charge app developers Apple whatever they deem to be fair and reasonable for using it. If they don't like it, they should have created their own App Store 4G networking technology.

Did I get that right? 😂
I don’t believe you got it right. A concept such as FRAND does not apply to the App Store. Other than that one little insignificant detail you got it correct.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
BaldiMac Avatar
3 days ago at 08:40 am

Apple Optis Wireless created the App Store 4G networking technology. It's their IP. Therefore, they should be able to charge app developers Apple whatever they deem to be fair and reasonable for using it. If they don't like it, they should have created their own App Store 4G networking technology.

Did I get that right? 😂
Other than the obvious distinction that Optis agreed to license their IP on FRAND terms as part of a standard, and Apple didn’t. As you quoted.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
k1121j Avatar
3 days ago at 08:01 am
That would be a popcorn moment if Apple backed out of the UK.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)