Delhi High Court Rules on Confidentiality Club in Nokia-Asustek Patent Dispute

Delhi High Court Rules on Confidentiality Club in Nokia-Asustek Patent Dispute

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has ruled on the constitution of a Confidentiality Club in a patent dispute between Nokia Technologies Oy and Asustek Computer Inc & Anr. The court considered the plaintiff's application for the constitution of a Confidentiality Club to protect sensitive information related to comparable licenses.

Factual Background

Nokia Technologies Oy filed a suit against Asustek Computer Inc & Anr for alleged infringement of patents. The plaintiff sought to constitute a Confidentiality Club to share comparable licenses with the defendants.

Procedural Background

The court considered the plaintiff's application and the defendants' objections to the proposed conditions for the Confidentiality Club. The court heard arguments from both parties and considered the relevant rules and precedents.

Issues

1. Constitution of Confidentiality Club: Whether a Confidentiality Club should be constituted to protect sensitive information related to comparable licenses.

2. Inclusion of In-House Representatives: Whether in-house representatives of the defendants should be included in the Confidentiality Club.

3. Redaction of Confidential Documents: Whether the plaintiff can redact confidential documents and information.

Contentions of the Parties

Plaintiff's Contentions:

• A Confidentiality Club is necessary to protect sensitive information related to comparable licenses.
• In-house representatives of the defendants should not be allowed to participate in licensing negotiations with third-party licensees.
• The plaintiff should be allowed to redact confidential documents and information.

Defendants' Contentions:

• In-house representatives should be included in the Confidentiality Club.
• The plaintiff's proposal for redaction is vague and unreasonable.
• The plaintiff should disclose all comparable licenses.

Reasoning & Analysis

The bench of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that a Confidentiality Club should be constituted to protect sensitive information related to comparable licenses. The court also held that in-house representatives of the defendants can be included in the Confidentiality Club, but with certain conditions. The court directed the plaintiff to disclose all comparable licenses and allowed the plaintiff to redact confidential documents and information in accordance with the principles laid down in InterDigital v. Xiaomi.

Decision

The court disposed of the applications and directed the parties to constitute a Confidentiality Club in accordance with the directions given in the judgment.

Implications

The court's decision highlights the importance of protecting sensitive information in patent disputes. It also emphasizes the need for transparency and fairness in the disclosure of comparable licenses.

In this case the plaintiff was represented by Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Abhilasha Nautiyal, Mr. Shuvam Bhattarcharya, Ms. Asavari Jain, Mr. Vignesh Raj T and Mr. Aviral Goy, Advocates.