Navigating And Enforcing Patent Protection In The Space Industry

In recent years, the space industry has undergone significant innovation and commercialization. What was once a domain reserved for government agencies traditionally restricted by extremely high costs and resource demands has rapidly evolved into a growing sector where private companies are pioneering new technologies and commercial ventures. This surge in activity has made space technology not only a symbol of scientific progress but also a key driver of economic growth and competitiveness across the world.

Patent Protection and Enforcement

Protecting technological advancements is critical, and patents play a central role in doing so. Patents grant legal ownership over inventions, providing inventors and organisations the exclusive right to prevent others from making, using, or selling their inventions for a period of 20 years in selected jurisdictions. Given the substantial costs and investments involved in developing space technology, it is especially important to ensure that their full value is safeguarded through effective legal protection.

However, enforcing patent protection in outer space presents unique legal challenges, as space itself is not subject to the sovereignty of any one nation and so is not technically a jurisdiction. Despite these complexities, inventors and organisations alike have found a plethora of different ways to enforce their intellectual property rights for their innovations.

Boeing v. NASA - $28.3m in Damages

Patent infringement can often be established by demonstrating that unauthorised activity occurred within a specific jurisdiction on the ground before it occurs up in space.

One such example is Boeing's lawsuit against NASA which was settled in 2009. Boeing alleged that NASA, via its contractor Lockheed Martin, had used a patented process for producing an aluminium-lithium alloy without permission. The process, protected by Boeing's US Patent No. 4,840,682, enhances the strength and toughness of aerospace alloys and was utilised by NASA when constructing a lighter external fuel tank for the Space Shuttle – a critical component for missions involving the International Space Station.

Whilst the end use of the fuel tank would be in space, the court found that NASA had infringed the patent by using the process in the US without permission, resulting in Boeing being awarded $28.3 million in royalties and interest.

ViaSat v. Loral Space & Communications - $100m Settlement

The complexity of enforcing patents increases with hybrid technologies that spans both terrestrial and space applications, such as satellite communications and telecommunications.

Between 2012 and 2014, ViaSat Inc. sued Loral Space & Communications and its former manufacturing arm, Space Systems/Loral (SSL), for patent infringement and breach of contract. ViaSat claimed that SSL had improperly used confidential satellite technology protected across a number of patents, originally developed for a joint satellite construction project called ViaSat-1, in the development of a competing satellite, called Jupiter-1.

The court upheld ViaSat's breach of contract claim and found that information and technology protected by ViaSat's US Patents No. 8,010,043, 8,068,827, and 8,107,875 had been used by SSL in the US without permission to develop Jupiter-1, resulting in ViaSat being awarded $283 million, later reduced to $100 million plus interest in a settlement.

The case highlights that IP litigation in the space industry can have nine-figure financial consequences for organisations using patented technology without authority.

Ericsson v. Apple – Multi-Million Global Licencing Agreement

While litigation is one pathway for addressing infringement, parties often find that settlement and licencing agreements can provide more strategic and mutually beneficial outcomes.

In 2022, a dispute between Ericsson and Apple over patent-protected 5G cellular and standard essential technology escalated into a series of lawsuits across several countries around the world. The conflict stemmed from the expiration of a previous licencing agreement covering a multitude of patents and the failure to reach new terms.

Later that same year, both parties announced a new comprehensive global patent license and cross-licencing agreement, resulting in the dismissal of all pending legal actions and enhanced cooperation between the two companies.

Whilst the financial terms of the agreement were not fully disclosed, reports indicate that the agreement involved Apple making a one-time payment of around $400 million to Ericsson, showing just how valuable an agreement such as this one might be.

Conclusion

As the commercialisation of space accelerates, the importance of protecting intellectual property grows in tandem. Patents serve as a vital tool not only to protect innovation but also to foster trust and collaboration in a competitive global industry. Whether through litigation or licencing, the ability to enforce patent rights remains essential to ensuring that inventors and organisations can not only protect their developing technology but also their business interests, ultimately resulting in sustainable growth, innovation, and international cooperation in this evolving frontier.

General references:

Boeing v. NASA references:

ViaSat v. Loral Space & Communications references:

Ericsson v. Apple references:

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.