So a near-Non Practicing Entity is enforcing standards-essential software patents in a European court, under arguably unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory terms.
That's a lot of things the European Patent system is supposed to prevent, and exposes quite a number of loopholes.
> arguably unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory terms
I'll bite. How do you argue that?
We're taking the rest of my statement as accurate then? O:-)
Fine, so in addition to the fact that this whole action SHOULD be prima facie illegal in Europe; for the FRAND part (which is -to be fair- the weaker part of my argument, because this shouldn't be happening in the first place) :
* Forum shopping in Munich is at least somewhat unfair
* Implementors went $0.03, Uk court set interim rate of $0.365, now nokia is going for $0.69? We can argue unreasonable [1][3]
* Hisense settled at undisclosed terms, Acer and Asus were injuncted, so that counts towards discriminatory [2]
[1] https://www.juve-patent.com/cases/us-firms-secure-asian-impl...
[2] https://www.juve-patent.com/cases/hisense-settles-global-dis...
[3] https://ipfray.com/munich-i-regional-court-enjoins-computer-...