2026-07-24 - LD Düsseldorf - InterDigital v. Disney et al. - UPC_CFI_87/2025

If an NDA between the parties prevents one party from making submissions or producing documents, and the other party, without reasonable justification, refuses to amend the NDA to enable such production, this shall be to the detriment of the latter party. In such cases, if a party refers to steps within the FRAND negotiation programme and the Court is unable to examine these steps due to the other party’s refusal to amend the NDA, the steps will be considered to have been taken in accordance with the Huawei v ZTE judgment.

The Düsseldorf LD found Disney's Disney+ streaming service literally infringed InterDigital's HEVC-essential patent EP 2 449 782, rejected the counterclaim for revocation on all validity grounds, and rejected Disney's FRAND/Art. 102 TFEU defence on three independent grounds — no dominant position shown, the ITU declaration does not cover the asserted claims, and Disney was in any event an unwilling licensee under Huawei v ZTE. On the last point the Court held that where an NDA prevents a party from evidencing its negotiation conduct and the other party unreasonably refuses to lift it, the steps in question are deemed compliant with Huawei v ZTE to the detriment of the refusing party — here Disney. The Court granted the injunction, recall/removal (adapted to streaming, i.e. permanent deletion with proof), and a full Art. 67/68(3) UPCA information and accounting order, all subject to a confidentiality restriction under R. 262A RoP and, for the injunction/recall/removal, an EUR 8 million enforcement security under Art. 82(2) UPCA. An interim damages award was refused as wholly unsubstantiated.