On September 10, 2026, the Munich Regional Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) denied TCL’s request that InterDigital disclose comparable portfolio licensing agreements. The court held that it remains to be determined whether TCL is willing to accept a FRAND license, and therefore it is premature to discuss disclosure at this stage.

On September 10, 2026, Canon, Sony, Huawei, and OPPO partnered with Tulip Licensing—the parent company of Tulip Innovation—to launch a new imaging patent licensing program called “Tulip Imaging.” The program will manage a portfolio of more than 125,000 patents related to advanced digital imaging and information processing.

This batch of patents consists entirely of video standard-essential patents, covering core video coding and decoding technologies. Among them is “Method and Apparatus for Inter-Frame Prediction in a Video Processing System” (registration number US11,102,478). This patent pertains to inter-frame prediction technology in video processing systems, including core processes such as deriving control points for the current block and estimating motion vector values based on adjacent blocks.

On September 1, 2026, TCL North America (TTE Technology Inc.) filed a false advertising lawsuit against Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging that Samsung repackaged its older Crystal UHD standard LED TV models—simply by changing the casing—as Mini LED models for sale, in violation of the Lanham Act and relevant California unfair competition laws.

The four patents specifically involved in this lawsuit originate from the U.S. patents Mimir IP acquired from SK Hynix, primarily including U.S. Patents Nos. 7,468,317, 7,755,954, 7,978,547, and 8,274,102. In its complaint, Mimir IP asserts that MediaTek, as a major competitor of SK Hynix—the original patent owner—should have been aware of the existence of all four patents as of their respective grant dates. Furthermore, Mimir IP alleges that MediaTek, knowing that the accused SoCs incorporated infringing features, nevertheless encouraged third-party manufacturers, distributors, and customers to import, sell, and use products containing these SoCs, thereby constituting “indirect and willful infringement.”

The patent in question is European Patent EP2080349B1, which relates to technology for sharing multimedia content in peer-to-peer configurations. The original applicant was Sony Ericsson; the patent was later assigned to InterDigital. InterDigital alleged that Disney’s Disney+ streaming service indirectly infringed the patent through web pages and various mobile applications. Disney, in turn, filed a counterclaim seeking revocation, arguing that all relevant claims were invalid.

This case involved Patent EP2892442B1 (surgical torque transmission devices), with the accused infringing products being the “BoJin Diamond File” and the “BoJin Rose File.” Prior to the judgment, Defendant 1, Shanghai Bojin Medical Devices Co., Ltd., and Defendant 3, Shanghai Bojin Electronic Instrument Equipment Industry & Trade Co., Ltd.—both manufacturing entities—had reached a settlement with the plaintiff on August 27, leaving only Defendant 2, Shanghai International Holdings (Europe) Co., Ltd., the EU authorized representative, to continue participating in the proceedings.

The case began in November 2025, when Malikie filed a complaint with the Mannheim Division alleging that Xiaomi had infringed its EP2387862 patent, which relates to “systems and methods for determining the cause of an event.” Xiaomi promptly responded with a counterclaim seeking invalidation. Both parties jointly filed a motion to dismiss the case before the court had entered into substantive proceedings, and did not request a ruling on the allocation of litigation costs.

The main point of contention in this case was the “Prosecution-Bar Stipulation” signed by both parties during the prior ITC Section 337 investigation. In 2023, the parties reached an agreement in a cross-border intellectual property investigation requiring Shoals’ legal team—which had access to Voltage’s proprietary product solutions, design-around strategies, and other trade secrets—to establish a firewall and refrain from participating in the prosecution of the patents at issue. The defendant argued that Shoals had engaged in unfair conduct and contended that the patents at issue should be deemed unenforceable; however, the court ultimately did not uphold this central defense.

This lawsuit marks the latest development in the patent dispute between InterDigital and Disney, which has been ongoing for over a year. Since February 2025, the two parties have been engaged in a series of legal battles in the United States, Brazil, Germany, and the UPC over technologies such as video coding, HDR, and video streaming processing. According to statistics, InterDigital has so far obtained a total of seven injunctions against Disney in Brazil, Germany, and the UPC.