Key Points:
- Nokia accuses Paramount of infringing several streaming-related patents tied to video encoding, compression, buffering and delivery processes.
- Nokia says it notified Paramount of its portfolio in 2022 and engaged in talks, but no license was secured. It claims Paramount knowingly used its patented technology without paying royalties.
- A senior executive said the decision to sue Paramount wasn’t made in haste, but that the company felt it needed to protect its intellectual property after making sizable investments in research and development.
Finnish technology firm Nokia has filed a lawsuit against Paramount in federal court, alleging the media conglomerate is infringing on a suite of video technology patents used to power its streaming platforms.
The complaint, lodged Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, accuses Paramount — in its former incarnation as Paramount Global and in its current form following its merger with Skydance Media — of using Nokia’s patented innovations without authorization across its flagship platforms, including Paramount Plus, Pluto TV and BET Plus.
The filing alleges Paramount had knowledge of the patents since at least late 2022 but continued using the technology without payment, amounting to willful infringement. Nokia is asking the court for damages dating back six years, enhanced penalties, attorneys’ fees, interest and other relief.
Nokia says the patents in question cover core video encoding and delivery processes that allow for higher-quality video streams with reduced bandwidth. The Finnish company contends Paramount has benefited from the innovations, which are used in backend functions like transcoding, encoding and authentication, but has refused to enter into a license agreement.
“Nokia’s patented technology benefits Paramount’s ad-supported and subscription offerings,” the complaint states. “Though other companies have recognized and validated the strength of Nokia’s video patent portfolio by taking licenses, Paramount is using Nokia’s patented technology without a license.”
The lawsuit centers on 13 U.S. patents, including protections for methods of motion coding, sub-pixel interpolation, quantizer parameters, video frame grouping, spatial prediction, error detection, picture buffering, and secure dynamic authority delegation. Nokia argues these patents are critical to the efficient functioning of modern streaming systems.
Negotiations between the two companies date back to September 2022, when Nokia first alerted Paramount to its extensive patent portfolio. That December, Nokia identified several specific patents it believed Paramount was practicing without authorization. Despite multiple rounds of talks, no licensing deal was reached.
Officials at Paramount have not commented publicly on the matter.
In a statement, Nokia’s Vice President of IP Licensing Vipul Mehrotra said the lawsuit was about ensuring companies reward Nokia’s efforts in developing certain technology when they further their streaming businesses based on it.
“Companies providing video streaming services enjoy huge benefits from the research and development conducted by Nokia,” Mehrotra said. “Without this innovation, streaming services would not work the way that consumers have come to expect. Nokia reinvests the compensation we receive for the use of our video technologies in developing next generation multimedia technologies. Our preference is to avoid litigation, but Paramount left us with no choice. We hope that Paramount accepts their obligation and pays for the use of our technologies in their streaming services.”
Mahrotra said the decision to sue Paramount wasn’t a hasty one, and that the company spent time thinking about the matter before bringing it to court.
“We’ve been at the forefront of video technology for more than 30 years, and we can’t let our foundational technologies be used without fair compensation,” Mahrotra affirmed. “I hope we can conclude similar discussions with other video streaming companies that use our technologies without the need for legal action. As we have shown today, we are prepared to protect our intellectual property where necessary.”
—
Read more:
