This ruling marks a significant advancement in BMW's legal strategy to halt Onesta's parallel litigation in Germany. The case represents another landmark instance of U.S. courts employing forum non conveniens to intervene in overseas patent litigation, focusing on clarifying jurisdictional coordination between U.S. and EU courts when the disputed patent is U.S.-based but the defendant maintains substantial operations within the EU.

Acer recently filed patent infringement lawsuits against three major U.S. telecom giants—AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon—in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuits allege that these carriers have implemented multiple wireless communication technology patents without authorization.

This counterclaim in Delaware represents Warner Bros.' forceful counterattack against Nokia's global patent lawsuit filed in November 2025. At that time, Nokia simultaneously sued in the US, Europe, Germany, and Brazil, alleging that Warner's streaming services—including HBO Max and Discovery+—infringed upon 13 of its video encoding patents.

Nokia announced on January 8 that it has signed a multi-year patent license agreement with Hisense, authorizing the consumer electronics manufacturer to use Nokia video technology in its television products. Under the terms of the agreement, Hisense will pay Nokia patent royalties. This agreement resolves all patent-related litigation between the two parties in all jurisdictions. This marks the first patent licensing agreement between Nokia and Hisense, with specific terms remaining confidential per mutual agreement.

This settlement concludes over a year of protracted patent litigation. Previously, Roku's streaming devices and Prime Video service extensively utilized HEVC technology without securing a licensing agreement with Access Advance. Access Advance alleged that Roku used its patents without paying reasonable royalties.

This ruling propels the consolidated pre-trial proceedings for 16 copyright lawsuits against OpenAI into a lengthy and complex discovery phase. The multi-district consolidated litigation, heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, forms a central part of dozens of lawsuits filed by content creators against AI companies. It aims to resolve key legal issues surrounding the training of generative AI using copyrighted material.

The case centers on European Patent EP 2 449 782 held by InterDigital. Previously, on September 30, 2025, the Mannheim Regional Court granted InterDigital's application for a unilateral injunction. This injunction prohibits Amazon from seeking or advancing proceedings in any jurisdiction, including UK courts, that could impede InterDigital's enforcement of its patent rights before the UPC. Specifically, it bars Amazon from applying for court rulings on provisional licenses or asserting that InterDigital violated its RAND (Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory) obligations.

The dispute traces back to October 2025 when Onesta filed three patent infringement lawsuits against BMW in Munich Regional Court I, Germany—two involving U.S. patents. The German court invoked precedent established by the European Court of Justice in BSH v. Electrolux, asserting non-German patents could be litigated.

This task force aims to address increasingly complex patent licensing challenges in the communications and internet technology sectors, promote transparency in standard-setting processes, and foster balanced development between innovators and implementers.

The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, naming Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, Meta, xAI, and Perplexity AI as defendants. This marks the first copyright lawsuit against xAI over its training practices and the first time Perplexity has been sued by authors.