Exclusive: Dolby-backed Opus pool reveals royalty demands
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Exclusive: Dolby-backed Opus pool reveals royalty demands

AdobeStock_482647355 (1).jpeg

The Vectis IP pool will charge €15c per unit for access to patents covering the Opus audio technology standard

Licensing firm Vectis IP, backed by Dolby and research group Fraunhofer, launched a new patent pool for the Opus audio technology standard today, January 16.

The pool licence offers access to more than 300 patents owned by Dolby and Fraunhofer at a rate of €15c ($16c) per unit with an annual cap of €15 million.

Licensees who sign up before October this year will pay a lower rate of €10c per unit, subject to an annual cap of €10 million.

The pool will not seek any royalties from licensees who sign up before October for any historic use of the standard.

The royalties charged to licensees who sign up after October will date to January 1, 2023.

The Opus standard was developed by programmers at Skype, Mozilla, and the Xiph.Org Foundation.

These organisations made a commitment to license the tech on an open-access, royalty-free basis.

None of Vectis, Dolby, or Fraunhofer were part of the standardisation process for Opus, which was carried out by the Internet Engineering Task Force.

Giustino de Sanctis, CEO of Vectis IP, told Managing IP that the original Opus developers’ royalty-free commitment didn’t cover all of the patents essential to the standard.

De Sanctis said the pool would target licensees involved in the manufacture of tablets, PCs, and smartphones.

Asked whether implementers would react negatively to being asked to pay for access to Opus technology, he said Vectis would work to educate the market.

“If the market has a certain expectation, you have to face that expectation.”

He acknowledged a comparison with the auto industry, which initially resisted pressure to license cellular patents.

“Automakers never thought this was a problem.

“It will be part of our job to go out there and explain this reality,” he said.

De Sanctis said the pool had been involved in discussions with potential licensors since an original call for patents last September.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers weigh in on the USPTO’s request for comment on the effects of AI on prior art analysis and obviousness determinations
A vast majority of corporates – especially smaller businesses – rely on a trusted referral when instructing external counsel, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The Munich Regional Court ruled that Lenovo was an unwilling licensee and had engaged in ‘holdout’ tactics
Technological innovation should play a critical role in advancing sustainable practices, argues Justin Delfino, global head of IP and R&D at Evalueserve
Ewan Grist of Bird & Bird, who acted for Lidl in its trademark victory against Tesco, reveals some of the lessons brand owners can take from the judgment
Dolby’s lawsuit at the Delhi High Court follows a record win by Ericsson earlier this year against the same defendant
Tee Tan, chief information officer at the owner of several IP firms, says to avoid tech just for the sake of it and explains how his company builds in-house tools
Regardless of whether the FTC’s ban on non-competes goes into effect, businesses should stop relying on these agreements
Mary Till, a former legal advisor at the USPTO who has joined Finnegan this week, is looking forward to providing clients with a USPTO perspective
Gift this article