Qualcomm's president says Apple iPhone modem saga will end soon -- but that seems unlikely...
Qualcomm President Cristiano Amon believes that the legal battle with Apple over the iPhone modem could end in 2019, but if history -- and Apple's remarks -- are any indication, that's a long-shot.

Apple and Qualcomm's royalty payments fight is heading to the San Diego federal court on April 15, seemingly bringing to a close a disagreement between the tech titans that has taken place over the last two years. In the view of Cristiano Amon, the end is apparently in sight.
"We feel like we are probably near the end of this game - we have a lot of legal milestones approaching," Amon advised to Yahoo Finance. "We see 2019 as having events that will drive resolution one way or another."
Amon's comments are similar to those made by CEO Steve Mollenkopf on November 28, where he suggested the two are "on the doorstep of finding a resolution." Claiming the two communicate as companies, Mollenkopf further suggested Qualcomm would "love to work with Apple" on future products, including a 5G-equipped iPhone.
Apple responded to Mollenkopf's comments in court, with Apple attorney William Isaacson taking a moment during a recent hearing to stress no negotiations were happening "at any level," there hadn't been talks "in months," and that reports the firms were close to a settlement are "not true."
In early November, a source believed to be within Apple or a hired legal team advised to one report "There is absolutely no meaningful discussion taking place between us and Qualcomm, and there is no settlement in sight. We are gearing up for trial."
As for Amon's suggestion the legal action is "probably near the end," it is highly likely that whatever the result of April's trial, the two companies will continue to argue over the result for a considerable amount of time, appealing to have the potentially high judgements against them overturned. For comparison, Apple's first blockbuster trial with Samsung took over five years from filing to completion and the stakes are no smaller in the Apple versus Qualcomm matter.
To wit, Qualcomm will probably dispute being demanded to pay the $1 billion in royalties that Apple believes were withheld, and would fight any court-ordered reduction in royalties that Apple would need to pay for its components and technology usage.
Qualcomm's complaints against Apple include the iPhone producer attempting to pay less than the fair market value for standard-essential payments, wrongly inducing regulatory action in a number of jurisdictions, breach of contract, and more recently accusations of stolen trade secrets being provided to chip competitor Intel.
Ultimately, neither company wants to lose this battle.

Apple and Qualcomm's royalty payments fight is heading to the San Diego federal court on April 15, seemingly bringing to a close a disagreement between the tech titans that has taken place over the last two years. In the view of Cristiano Amon, the end is apparently in sight.
"We feel like we are probably near the end of this game - we have a lot of legal milestones approaching," Amon advised to Yahoo Finance. "We see 2019 as having events that will drive resolution one way or another."
Amon's comments are similar to those made by CEO Steve Mollenkopf on November 28, where he suggested the two are "on the doorstep of finding a resolution." Claiming the two communicate as companies, Mollenkopf further suggested Qualcomm would "love to work with Apple" on future products, including a 5G-equipped iPhone.
Apple responded to Mollenkopf's comments in court, with Apple attorney William Isaacson taking a moment during a recent hearing to stress no negotiations were happening "at any level," there hadn't been talks "in months," and that reports the firms were close to a settlement are "not true."
In early November, a source believed to be within Apple or a hired legal team advised to one report "There is absolutely no meaningful discussion taking place between us and Qualcomm, and there is no settlement in sight. We are gearing up for trial."
As for Amon's suggestion the legal action is "probably near the end," it is highly likely that whatever the result of April's trial, the two companies will continue to argue over the result for a considerable amount of time, appealing to have the potentially high judgements against them overturned. For comparison, Apple's first blockbuster trial with Samsung took over five years from filing to completion and the stakes are no smaller in the Apple versus Qualcomm matter.
To wit, Qualcomm will probably dispute being demanded to pay the $1 billion in royalties that Apple believes were withheld, and would fight any court-ordered reduction in royalties that Apple would need to pay for its components and technology usage.
Qualcomm's complaints against Apple include the iPhone producer attempting to pay less than the fair market value for standard-essential payments, wrongly inducing regulatory action in a number of jurisdictions, breach of contract, and more recently accusations of stolen trade secrets being provided to chip competitor Intel.
Ultimately, neither company wants to lose this battle.
Comments
Apple will then make their own Wireless Chip, which combines 802.11ax , 802.11ay, 4G, 5G and Bluetooth.
Apple will never go back to strict Qualcomm chips though because having Intel as a viable alternative helps Apple keep prices lower. 5g will level the playing field more as well.
I accidentally saw the word "modem" as "modern"...
the issue is that Qualcomm hasn’t been doing this, because of their monopoly, and so they’re in trouble in a number of jurisdictions. If Apple wanted to make modems, and applied to these companies, or to organizations assigned to be the industry patent holders for these essential patents, they would have to respond positively, and license them. Often, these patents are in bundles along with other essential patents for a particular use, because all of them will be needed, so that bundle, or several, are licensed.
its estimated that the average smartphone has about 250,000 patents assigned to it. There’s no way that phone manufacturers could afford to make phones if these licenses weren’t licensed as FRAND.
Lawyers love it. Thanks Qualcomm!
The only way I can see QC’s statement being true is if they are getting ready to settle on terms that are very favorable to Apple or they have some ‘bombshell’ evidence that will swing the courts irreversibly in their favor. Given the proceedings so far and the amount of money involved, I can’t see either case being true.
we don’t know what Apple and Intel are up to. But if Intel won’t allow it either, Apple could go that route if they felt strongly enough about it. They’ve hired more than a few modem engineers over the past few years, and can hire as many as they need. They can license any patents they need to. Qualcomm has been ordered by the court to license their essential patents under FRAND to any company that wants them.
Of course, unless the performance was drastically different the main people who would notice would be the diehard fans on sites like this. The vast majority of people don’t even know what a cellular modem is, much less the specs of the various models. All they care about is Spotify, Netflix and face time.
i think that with modems, it’s different. There are standards that have to be met that Apple would need to meet. I don’t know what they could do so differently that they would do it for that reason. It would likely just be for power and room saving on the technical front, and cost savings. If they wanted to be innovative with this, they really should have started when 3G was still the thing. Modems were much simpler, and it would have been easier, and cheaper to get started. Now, it could be a nightmare. Intel has thousands of engineers working on this already.