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.

This case stems from an infringement lawsuit filed by InterDigital against TCL based on European Patent No. EP2452498. The patent relates to block coding and region-based filtering in High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC). TCL raised a FRAND defense and requested that the court order InterDigital to submit comparable portfolio licensing agreements it had entered into with other licensees, in order to determine whether InterDigital’s offer complied with the FRAND principles.

The Munich Regional Court did not follow TCL’s line of argument regarding the FRAND defense in this instance. The court noted that the obligation for SEP rights holders to submit comparable agreements applies only to prospective licensees who are willing to obtain a license on FRAND terms; whether TCL qualifies as such a “willing licensee” remains disputed, and the issue of intent will be left for the full bench to ultimately decide.

This ruling means that InterDigital is temporarily not required to submit these comparable licensing agreements. TCL argues that without these agreements, it is difficult to verify whether InterDigital’s offer is FRAND. However, by treating TCL’s willingness to be licensed as a preliminary issue, the court has also indicated that it may be able to address the FRAND defense without conducting an in-depth comparison of InterDigital’s third-party licenses.

Case Background

On February 10, 2026, InterDigital announced that it had initiated patent enforcement actions against TCL and Hisense in multiple jurisdictions, including the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the Munich Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the Munich Regional Court in Germany, the State Court of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, and the Delhi High Court in India;

On February 26, 2026, InterDigital and its affiliates filed a petition with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) for a Section 337 investigation, alleging that certain video-enabled electronic devices exported to, imported into, or sold in the United States infringed on six of its U.S. registered patents, and requesting that the ITC issue a limited exclusion order and a cease-and-desist order;

On April 15, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas granted TCL’s motion to stay proceedings in that district court pending the final determination (including any appeals) in the ITC Section 337 investigation (Case No. 337-TA-1495);

In August 2026, TCL filed an antitrust lawsuit in China, alleging that InterDigital abused its dominant market position and refused to license on FRAND terms;

On September 9, 2026, the ITC issued a partial final ruling in the 337 case, affirming the administrative law judge’s preliminary ruling and approving Dolby Laboratories, Inc. as a third-party intervenor in the case;

On September 10, 2026, the Munich Regional Division of the UPC ruled on TCL’s FRAND defense: it denied TCL’s request that InterDigital disclose comparable portfolio licensing agreements, holding that whether TCL qualifies as a “willing licensee” is itself a matter of dispute.