HTC and Apple settle patent disputes, sign 10-year licensing agreement

HTC and Apple settle patent disputes, sign 10-year licensing agreement

Summary: Apple and HTC reached a settlement that dismissed all lawsuits and set up a 10-year licensing agreement.


It seems lawsuits over patents and other technologies have been filed between just about everyone in the mobile industry and it seemed to hurt more than help as tempers flared on both sides.

Two major players in the ongoing patent litigation battle are settling their scores and making up.

Apple and HTC reached a settlement agreement that dismisses all lawsuits and sets up a 10-year licensing agreement. 

"HTC is pleased to have resolved its dispute with Apple, so HTC can focus on innovation instead of litigation," said HTC chief executive Peter Chou.  

“We are glad to have reached a settlement with HTC,” said Tim Cook, CEO of Apple.  "We will continue to stay laser focused on product innovation."

The license agreement extends to current and future patents held by both parties. The terms of the settlement are confidential so we won't find out all the details just yet. 

I know that other mobile players have licensing agreements and hope that others can work together as well. Maybe the U.S. government should look to these two companies example and now try to work together too?

Topics: Mobility, Apple, HTC, iPhone, Smartphones

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Mutually Assured Destruction is a wonderful thing

    Although incredibly expensive and resource wasteful, sometime committing to a MAD policy is the only was to "keep the peace" or buy time until saner minds prevail and peace treaties (or ten year licensing agreements, in this case) are signed.
  • HTC is serios red (losses), so they could not affor dealing with Apple any

    ... more.

    However, Samsung is highly profitable, so they declined Steven Job's attempt to settle/license for more than a year (spring 2010 to spring 2011) and the settlement is not expected now.
    • Sadly you may be correct.

      This is plain common sense news. For samsung and apple they may have invesrwd too much brand identity into their legal battles to easily get put of it. However rest assured that these kind of agreements are nothing new in tech and are the only way. Mobile devices have provided a new platform and conpanys on all sides have been posturing for dominance. The reality is that it is no different to the desktop battles in the 90's; you have to have conpetition, mow war and treaties are always signed - think of ms bailing apple out when they nearly went undwr or office comming to mac.

      Simple fact is samsung and apple need some humble pie. They need to get out of the courtrooms and get back to making devices only. A quick flick through tech litigation history should tell them that when the companies are this big you never really win, it just costs a lot if time and money slogging it out. The battles are win and lost on the shelves, the courtroom has always been an expensive and futile sideshow. Even if you get a clear win, the conpetitor will wiggle round it with a matter of months.
      • Sadly, however, you are not

        As usual, your are woefully misinformed.
        First, at NO point did MS EVER bail Apple out. Please check your facts before you post this nonsense. When Jobs returned to Apple, he wanted to eliminate all distractions to focus on the iMac, so he settled a long-standing law-suit with MS. This lawsuit resulted in MS buying 150M USD in nonvoting stock. This 150M did NOT, in any way, shape, or form, "bail apple out". What utter nonsense.
        At the time this stock purchase was made, Apple had between 2 and 4 BILLION dollars in liquid capital. 150M did not only not help Apple, it was chump change. BTW, Apple donated the 150M to its education division to fund computers discounts for schools. MS sold the 150M in stick years later at a substantial profit.
        As for the law suit, Apple had MS dead to rights, caught red-handed stealing.
        If you had bothered to check your facts before you posted, you might have though better of it.
        And it is "90s" not "90's".
        • Oh, and Office didn't "come to the Mac", it "came" to Windows.

          Office, and its component apps, were originally written for the Mac only, not Windows. Its chief components, starting with the GUI version of Word, were originally released in 1984 for the Mac. There was NO equivalent Windows version until 1989! Hell, there was even a version for the Atari ST 3 years earlier than the Windows version.
          In addition, the first Office, a bundling of Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and Mail, was released for the Mac in 1989. The first Windows version of Office did not see the light of day until over a year later.
          So once again, your posts are conspicuously light on facts to the point of being tiresome.
        • People in glass houses...

          "As usual, your are woefully misinformed."

          That should be "you are" or "you're".
          • Typos and grammar mistakes

            are not examples of being woefully misinformed. Especially in light of the lack of an edit function. If that is your only argument, then you don't have one. Note that while I did point out a similar error, it was NOT my sole argument, or even part of my argument at all.
        • The New York times says "Microsoft bailed out Apple"

  • Is this the end..

    ...of Steve Jobs' misguided dream of destroying Android through litigation?

    Let's hope so.
    • Misguided?

      Eric Schmidt clearly stole the whole idea. Jobs was perfectly on the moral high ground.
      • Hypocrit

        "Good artists copy, great artists steal."
        • Yes yes, except

          if that great artist was invited into the house of the person they are stealing from, given hospitality, granted unparalleled access, given inside information on brush techniques, materials, and potential business patrons, and then turns around and tries to take those patrons behind your back.
          Also, while I appreciate the utter ingenuity and originality of using Steve Jobs' quote there (since clearly no one has ever thought to do that before) there is a marked difference between stealing a few ideas, and looking over your "friend's shoulder" making a note of his check routing number, and then attempting to bleed him dry.
  • As Winston Churchill Said...

    ..."An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."
    • Churchill vs Chamberlain

      What people forget is that the British, American and French industrialists supported Hitler from the start. Hitler would have been a waco-crackpot known only to obscure historians were it not for his wealthy donors who shared his contempt for organized labor, safety regulation, and public welfare programs that redistributed wealth. Who really fed the crocodile?
  • There is no room for startups and small businesses

    Only casualty of patent war in mobile and software industry is startups and small businesses.
    Technology allows small businesses to innovate and compete against large players at par. In the past small businesses did not have capital to compete with large businesses; however in modern time a small business can easily compete against them.

    Large organisations are using patents as scare tactic, weapon of mass destruction or as means of extortion against small businesses. Most CEOs of small businesses will sweat the moment legal extortion letter comes from large business, let alone fight in courtroom.

    It does not matter who is right or wrong, whether it is ethical or unethical, it is all big boy bullying small. Media reports big bull fights such as between Samsung, MS, Apple, Google, Oracle etc; however none of small business squeeze is reported.

    Government is suppose to provide protection and level playing field for small businesses, but it failed to do so by avoiding reform of patent system.