Solas OLED Ltd, a Dublin, Ireland-based licensor of technology focused on the OLED market, announced in a press release that it has won its patent infringement action in Germany against LG Display Co., LG Display Germany GmbH, LG Electronics Inc., LG Electronics Deutschland GmbH, and Sony Europe B.V. In a detailed, 43-page decision issued November 6, 2020, the Mannheim District Court in Germany (court ref. 7 O 37/19) held that the defendants had infringed Solas’ German patent DE 102 54 511 B4 concerning a control circuit for light emitting diodes. The technology at issue is used in screens in certain LG and Sony OLED televisions.
“We are pleased with the decision, in particular the Court’s acknowledgement that the efforts of patent licensing companies such as ours, to enforce an injunction in order to encourage infringers to take a license, is an inherent part of the patent system and part of the applicable legal and economic order,” said Ciaran O’Gara, Managing Director of Solas. “It is through this system that innovators are rewarded and encouraged to continue to innovate.” 
As a result of the decision, which can be appealed, and subject to Solas posting a security as indicated by the Court, among other obligations the defendants will have to cease and desist from marketing infringing products in Germany; they will have to recall from commercial customers all infringing products; and must render to Solas a detailed accounting necessary to establish damages owed by the defendants for sales of infringing products in Germany dating back to April, 2009.
Of particulate note, the Mannheim District Court stated “[i]n the opinion of the Chamber, the fact that a patent enforcement entity seeks to enforce a cease and desist claim in order to encourage infringers to take out a license is therefore not per se such an exceptional case [justifying to deny an injunction], but immanent to the patent system as part of the applicable legal and economic order (see already Chamber, judgment of 27.02.2009 – 7 O 94/08, BeckRS 2009, 08150). The fact that the plaintiff is not active in the market as a manufacturer, but rather exploits the research and development work carried out by the University of Stuttgart does not constitute an illegitimate business purpose. Rather, the plaintiff thereby indirectly financially supports the university’s research and development activities in favor of the commercial technology market.”
