2026-06-12 - LD Mannheim - DJI et al. v. Irdeto et al. - UPC_CFI_735/2025

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The Mannheim Local Division dismissed both an infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation brought against the same patent, and it did so on one construction applied symmetrically to validity and infringement. Construing the claim, the Court held that the secured software agent — in its entirety or at least the functionality responsible for validation — must reside in the same abstraction layer as the operating system kernel, that the validation must be triggered by the very request received through the upcall and must therefore occur at runtime rather than only at boot time, and that a mere permission check of the SELinux kind does not qualify as validation. On that construction the revocation attacks failed: a publicly available kernel source tree is a list of building blocks rather than a usable kernel and discloses no running combination performing runtime validation, D1 places the verification service in user space, and D6 discloses neither validation beyond permission granting nor sole access to a secured data storage; no combination supplied the missing features because the cryptographic context of the citations gives no prompt to restrict storage access. The same construction defeated the infringement claim: the claimant's own evidence, the DJI Drone Security White Paper, describes dm-verity as a boot-time integrity check, and no fact was put forward showing runtime operation in the accused embodiments. With each side losing one action the Court ordered each party to bear its own costs, holding that the higher value set for the counterclaim did not by itself make the counterclaim's winner the predominant winner, because that value reflects the patent's worth beyond these proceedings.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_735/2025