Monitoring active

Your patent analyst
never sleeps

PatentPulse autonomously monitors FRAND disputes, SEP licensing shifts, and competition law changes across every jurisdiction that matters. Daily briefings, zero billable hours.

Start Free Trial → View Dashboard
United States European Union China South Korea Japan Australia United Kingdom India United States European Union China South Korea Japan Australia United Kingdom India

Patent licensing moves faster than any human can track

FRAND rate disputes, competition authority rulings, new SEP declarations, injunction decisions. Across the US, EU, China, and beyond. By the time a consultant writes the memo, the landscape has already shifted.

$1.3B
Patent analytics market in 2025, growing 13% annually
9
Key jurisdictions with active FRAND regulatory changes
24/7
Monitoring cadence. Not quarterly. Not weekly. Always.
27
Court decisions linked directly to original judgments — BAILII, CAFC, WIPO, UPC, EPO and more
View primary sources →

How PatentPulse works

Monitor

Continuous scanning

Tracks court filings, regulatory announcements, standards body updates, and competition authority decisions across all major jurisdictions in real time.

Analyze

Cross-jurisdictional synthesis

Connects developments across borders. A ruling in Shenzhen that affects licensing in Munich. A US Federal Circuit decision that shifts FRAND benchmarks globally.

Brief

Actionable intelligence

Delivers daily briefings written for practitioners, not academics. What changed, why it matters, and what to do about it. Every morning in your inbox.

What we track

Every signal that moves the needle in patent licensing and competition law.

F

FRAND rate determinations

Court-set royalty rates, methodology shifts, and precedent-setting decisions globally.

S

SEP declarations & essentiality

New declarations, essentiality challenges, and patent pool developments.

C

Competition law enforcement

Antitrust actions, abuse of dominance rulings, and regulatory guidance updates.

I

Injunction & hold-up disputes

Anti-suit injunctions, hold-up/hold-out dynamics, and remedies across forums.

Recent FRAND decisions

The latest court judgments shaping SEP royalty rates globally.

Loading recent decisions…

Frequently asked questions

Everything you need to know about FRAND rates and SEP licensing.

A FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) royalty rate is the licensing fee that holders of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) must offer to implementers. Courts set specific FRAND rates when parties cannot agree through negotiation. Notable examples include the UK Supreme Court's Optis v Apple decision and the US Federal Circuit's Ericsson v Lenovo ruling.
Nine major jurisdictions actively determine FRAND royalty rates: United States (Federal Circuit and district courts), United Kingdom (Supreme Court and Patents Court), EU/UPC (Unified Patent Court, 17+ member states), Germany (Federal Court of Justice, Munich/Düsseldorf), China (Supreme People's Court), South Korea (Seoul Central District Court and KFTC), Japan (IP High Court), India (Delhi High Court), and Brazil (federal courts).
The Unified Patent Court (UPC), operational since 2023, covers 17+ EU member states. It follows the CJEU Huawei v ZTE framework: a SEP holder must notify the implementer, make a FRAND offer, and the implementer must respond. The UPC can set global FRAND rates, grant injunctions, and award damages across all member states simultaneously — making it the most powerful SEP forum in Europe.
Courts use several methodologies: (1) Comparable licenses — real-world agreements between comparable parties; (2) Top-down — starting from total royalty stack, allocating by patent value; (3) Bottom-up — valuing individual patents then aggregating; (4) SSPPU (smallest saleable patent-practicing unit) in US courts. Landmark methodology decisions include Judge Selna's Ericsson v Apple (2023) and Mr Justice Mellor's Panasonic v Xiaomi (2023).
Key decisions include: Lenovo v Ericsson (US Federal Circuit, 2024) — first appellate court to set a global FRAND rate; Nokia v Amazon (UK Patents Court, 2024) — IoT device FRAND determination; Panasonic v Oppo (UPC, 2024) — first UPC FRAND injunction; Tesla v Avanci/InterDigital (UK, 2025) — connected vehicle SEP licensing. PatentPulse tracks all 39 landmark decisions with direct links to court judgments.
FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) and RAND (Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) are essentially equivalent terms used by different standards bodies. ETSI uses FRAND; IEEE and ANSI use RAND. Both require SEP holders to license on (1) fair and reasonable terms and (2) non-discriminatory terms across similarly situated licensees. The practical legal analysis is identical in most jurisdictions.

The regulatory landscape doesn't wait.
Neither should you.

Get the daily FRAND briefing delivered to your inbox every morning. AI-synthesized intelligence across US, EU, China, UK, and international jurisdictions.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime. Delivered every morning at 6 AM UTC.

Or browse the live dashboard → See paid plans from $99/mo →