- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Apple to pay $308.5 million for infringing Patent related to Digital Right Management
Apple to pay $308.5 million for infringing Patent related to Digital Right Management Federal Jury in Marshall, Texas has ordered Apple to pay $308.5 million for infringing a patent related to digital right management, as claimed by Personalized Media Communication (PMC). The decision came after PMC sued Apple contending that it has infringed its patent and technology including FairPlay,...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Apple to pay $308.5 million for infringing Patent related to Digital Right Management
Federal Jury in Marshall, Texas has ordered Apple to pay $308.5 million for infringing a patent related to digital right management, as claimed by Personalized Media Communication (PMC).
The decision came after PMC sued Apple contending that it has infringed its patent and technology including FairPlay, which is used for the distribution of encrypted content from its iTunes, App Store, and Apple Music applications. The Jury held Apple accountable and ordered to pay the amount and also the running royalty to PMC, depending on the amount of sale of product and services.
As per Bloomberg report, one expert for Sugar Land, Texas-based Personalized Media had calculated Apple owed $240 million in royalties. Apple was certainly was disappointed with the ruling and would appeal. In an emailed statement to Bloomberg, the company said, "Cases like this, brought by companies that don't make or sell any products, stifle innovation and ultimately harm consumers."
PMC filed the lawsuit in 2015, to which Apple challenged the validity of the patent at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A U.S. Appeals Court last year reversed the board's decision that certain patent claims were invalid, thus reviving the case for trial. U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap last week also adopted a magistrate's recommendation denying Apple's request to find the patent invalid.
It is not the first time; PMC lodged any case against a giant. A case against Google and Youtube was also filed by PMC which was subsequently won by those giants. A case against Netflix is still pending.