Continuing Legal Education (CLE)

Home

 

 

In This Section

AIPLA CLE Webinar: Global FRAND Licensing in the Digital Era: Negotiation, Disputes, Remedies, and Resolutions Across Jurisdictions

March 9, 2022 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM

Credits

1.5 CLE Credits Available

Registration

Fee: No Fee to attend for AIPLA members. There is a fee for CLE processing.

Register Now

 

This event is free to AIPLA members who are not requesting CLE. Standard webinar pricing applies to those requesting CLE. To select the free (no CLE) option, choose the "Registrant_No_CLE" registrant type on the registration page.

Experts from Europe, Japan, the UK, and the US share global and country-jurisdiction experiences on negotiating “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) licenses for the use of “standard essential patents” (SEPs)—for smart phones, smart cars, and other digital products and services. Current and evolving mechanisms to achieve FRAND licenses will be discussed—ranging from incentives for closing deals by amicable negotiation, court-imposed remedies like injunctions, royalty rate-setting, and damages, to alternative dispute resolution like mediation and arbitration. Meanwhile, the panel will address views on SEPs debated within various government authorities, with examples from Japan.
 

Presented by: Takanori ABE of ABE & Partners; Eeva Hakoranta of InterDigital; Dr. Clemens-August Heusch of  Nokia Solutions and Networks GmbH & Co KG; Jane Mutimear of Bird & Bird (UK); and moderated by Pat Breslin of Breslin Consulting, LLC

This event is free to AIPLA members who are not requesting CLE. Standard webinar pricing applies to those requesting CLE. CLE is included for our All Access Pass holders and Corporate Subscribers.

Pricing below only applies to those requesting CLE

site pricing covid

 

In response to Covid-19, AIPLA has put in-place a new process for Multiple Attendee Site registrations that allows each site registrant to participate in the webinar independently.


Special rate for AIPLA SOLO PRACTICE/SMALL FIRM MEMBERS:  $65
Special rate for AIPLA STUDENT MEMBERS:  $10


Registration includes:

  • For multiple-attendee sites, each registered participant will receive individual logins due to Covid-19 social distancing requirements.
  • CLE certification/processing for applicable states.  Reference CLE Information below for complete details.  
  • Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information, accessible 24-48 hours before webinar date.

Cancellation Policy:

To get full refund, registrant must request refund five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product. 

System requirements: 

Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.  Check system compatibility here.

Accessibility for hearing impaired:

AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact cle@aipla.org. We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.

CLE INFORMATION 

AIPLA is a pre-approved CLE provider with the following states:

  • Alaska
  • California
  • New Hampshire
  • New Mexico
  • New York
  • Pennsylvania
  • Vermont

AIPLA has applied for CLE accreditation in the following states: 

  • Alabama
  • Florida
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Minnesota
  • Ohio
  • Tennessee
  • Texas
  • Virginia
  • Washington
 
For information on CLE accreditation in all other states, please contact our CLE Department at cle@aipla.org.  CLE credit may be available, but will require additional time for approval and COA delivery.


CLE Restrictions: 

ATTENTION attorneys in Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah

These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit.  Multiple attendees prohibited.

ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona

Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.

ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire

New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53.  The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting NH CLE credit after the webinar.   

 Disclaimer:  AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association.  The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content.  AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice.  The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors.  These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.


Add to:

 

 

News

  • TermDisc-Comments-March21-logo AIPLA Comments on CNIPA Draft Measures for Prioritized Patent Examination

    April 1, 2026

    Arlington, VA. March 30, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) regarding the Draft Measures for the Administration of Prioritized Examination of Patents.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc

    March 31, 2026

    Arlington, VA. March 27, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889. AIPLA urges the Court to affirm the Federal Circuit’s application of the established Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard and inducement law in reviewing Hikma’s motion to dismiss Amarin’s claim that Hikma’s conduct, in combination with its “skinny label,” induced infringement of Amarin’s patented treatment methods.
  • Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment

    March 25, 2026

    On March 25, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. The majority opinion limits contributory liability to situations where a party intended that its service be used for infringement, either by affirmatively inducing infringement or by selling a service tailored to infringement. A concurring opinion by Justice Sotomayor argues that the material contribution test should be retained, and that other forms of secondary liability can be found, which is consistent with the position asserted by AIPLA in its amicus brief filed on September 5, 2025. To read the opinion of the Court, please click here.
  • Writing AIPLA Comments on the Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China

    March 23, 2026

    Arlington, VA. February 9, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress regarding the latest Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China. AIPLA recognized the NPC’s efforts to streamline trademark procedures, strengthen protection, and address abusive and bad-faith filing practices.
  • AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in USAA v. PNC Bank

    March 3, 2026

    Arlington, VA. March 2, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in USAA v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 25-853, in support of USAA’s petition for certiorari, urging the Court to provide much-needed guidance to address the unpredictable and overly broad application of the judicial exceptions to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, particularly the “abstract idea” exception.