Apple, Qualcomm reach modem licensing deal to end 'no license, no chips' trial

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 127
    JFC_PAJFC_PA Posts: 929member
    So Apple, to future proof the 2019 iPhones will have a 5G chip available for those who keep their phone long enough (2-3 years?) for 5G to actually matter out in the real world beyond inside some Verizon stores and a few malls. 

    Okay by me. 
    hammeroftruthcornchip
  • Reply 62 of 127
    Apple was always going to pay back owed money it just depended on how much. Apple was always going to license the chip it just was a matter of how much. Until till we know how much the licensing is going to be going forward we don't know who won.  Qualcomm wants you to pay more just because you sell a product for more money. Imagine if you get a $60K car in the future with the same Qualcomm chip built into a $200 phone. That that car would cost you $800 more which is nuts. We will have to wait and see if there is a royalty change or not.
  • Reply 63 of 127
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    So they were talking... Didn't I read somewhere Apple vehemently denying talks?
    Perhaps the negotiations were all held via e-mail.
  • Reply 64 of 127
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    Wow! Basically, Qualcomm blinked. This is going to be a positive for AAPL's price....
    How so? QC wanted to settle all along, and this was Apple suing QC and supposedly considered to be in the driver's seat. Whatever agreement has been made will probably be surfaced at some point, at least in another courtroom,  since there is other litigation going on besides those cases involving Apple and Qualcomm.  Making a "special deal" favoring Apple over others might be difficult and I don't see that happening. 

    I don't personally think either one actually blinked but instead reached a pragmatic decision that benefits both companies. Maybe the personalities agreed to step aside and let negotiations develop without "feelings" getting in the way which was being reported as a problem. 

    Please. Qualcomm has lost every antitrust case brought against them around the world and has been fined close to $4 billion so far. And the FTC case hasn't even been settled yet.

    You'd have to be blind to what's been going on over the past few years to think that Qualcomm has the upper hand.

    Oh I forgot, Blackberry also won an arbitration case for another $900+ million.
    Yes, and I've no doubt you're disappointed that Apple didn't follow thru. Perhaps it's all as simple as Apple needs 5G chips for market reasons and QC needs a willing licensee to put on display to other companies who might be tempted. Settling benefits them both. 

    Why would I be disappointed? Apple won. They got licensing terms they can live with and access to 5G for future devices (and I bet a license should they decide to make their own as well).
  • Reply 65 of 127
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,499member
    gatorguy said:
    avon b7 said:
    So all those companies withholding payments to QC will now make them? On which terms? The disputed ones or the possible terms thrashed out in this Apple/QC agreement?
    Hey give it a few days. More details will emerge....
    Personally I would expect all those withholding payments will now pay up what was (or is?) owned. 
    Yes. No rush. I was simply wondering if at some point, a dig into another company's financial reports might give an indication of how much they ended up paying with regards to what was being held back. Assuming Apple's numbers didn't make things very clear.
  • Reply 66 of 127
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    elijahg said:
    So Apple was lying about having no meaningful discussion with Qualcomm?
    No, the meaningful discussion occurred after QCOM was handed a loss in court. They realize they were in a downward slide, and fact it came out they refuse to license 5G to Apple in retaliation the courts do not like this behavior. Court accept that two companies do not agree, but they need to stay civil with each other as they fight it out in court. 


    I worked for company where we were being sued by a supplier, and everyone wanted to stop doing business with them, but upper management told everyone to keep use them until it gets settled. The lawyers said the company could not afford the supplier to show up in court and say we retaliated against them.


    Yes Apple paid something, you have to pay something to license a product. The question is what is Apple licensing, did they license all the 5G technology so they can build their own modems for the next 6 yrs? We will have to wait and see the answer to that questions.
  • Reply 67 of 127
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,229member
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    Wow! Basically, Qualcomm blinked. This is going to be a positive for AAPL's price....although maybe the word had leaked out some time ago, and that would explain the big push upward for AAPL lately. Was this the worst kept secret in the world?

    Inquiring minds want to know…

    Early stock response has been very muted for Apple , but QC is up significantly. 
    That’s because QC had so much more risk exposed. As in substantially more. Apple had a sniffle. QC had walking pneumonia. 
    SpamSandwichMplsPericthehalfbee
  • Reply 68 of 127
    The truth very well could be they both blinked. 

    Apple, who right now is fighting negative press that people are tired of the new iPhone and see no need to upgrade and will still hold on to their older devices. They aren’t, but the adoption of new iPhones is slower than it has been in the past. For some people, they are holding out to see what replaces the XS line. To them, the XR is not the new phone they want. They want the XS, but at a XR price. 

    Apple is also concerned that the reports of a lack of a 5G roadmap will push potential upgrades away from them, so a deal to them was the lesser of 2 evils. Better to deal with the devil you know vis-à-vis Samsung. They know how to do it. 

    There are other news reports that Samsung is fairing better with the Galaxy S10 line, although I doubt it. There are many ads where carriers are giving away s10s when you buy one. That can’t be a good sign. Samsung is putting on a brave face, but they know they are in the same boat trying to sell a $1k phone.  It’s going to get worse when their folding phone ships this month. 

    For Qualcomm the risk was much higher. If this trial was to go forward, all of their strongarm tactics will be unveiled. Apple was lining up all of its upper management to show just how long and far Qualcomm has gone to intimidate Apple and other manufacturers into using their chips. Internal documents could have been unsealed and the rest of the world could see just how underhanded Qualcomm operates. This is why Samsung and others did side with Apple against Qualcomm in other cases. 

    So rather than taking a huge gamble in proceeding with this suit, Qualcomm has agreed to take less money, provide Apple chips it needs, keep it’s confidential agreements safe, and live to fight another day. 

    Apple won’t have to pay the ransom Qualcomm says it’s owed since they did lose that case. I’m sure the agreement covers letting that go or accepting a smaller amount in order to settle this case. 

    So now, Apple has a 5G plan if it decides to use Qualcomm chips and the tech media can now stop creating fud about Apple’s 5G future. 
    MplsP
  • Reply 69 of 127
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    The truth very well could be they both blinked. 

    Apple, who right now is fighting negative press that people are tired of the new iPhone and see no need to upgrade and will still hold on to their older devices. They aren’t, but the adoption of new iPhones is slower than it has been in the past. For some people, they are holding out to see what replaces the XS line. To them, the XR is not the new phone they want. They want the XS, but at a XR price. 

    Apple is also concerned that the reports of a lack of a 5G roadmap will push potential upgrades away from them, so a deal to them was the lesser of 2 evils. Better to deal with the devil you know vis-à-vis Samsung. They know how to do it. 

    There are other news reports that Samsung is fairing better with the Galaxy S10 line, although I doubt it. There are many ads where carriers are giving away s10s when you buy one. That can’t be a good sign. Samsung is putting on a brave face, but they know they are in the same boat trying to sell a $1k phone.  It’s going to get worse when their folding phone ships this month. 

    For Qualcomm the risk was much higher. If this trial was to go forward, all of their strongarm tactics will be unveiled. Apple was lining up all of its upper management to show just how long and far Qualcomm has gone to intimidate Apple and other manufacturers into using their chips. Internal documents could have been unsealed and the rest of the world could see just how underhanded Qualcomm operates. This is why Samsung and others did side with Apple against Qualcomm in other cases. 

    So rather than taking a huge gamble in proceeding with this suit, Qualcomm has agreed to take less money, provide Apple chips it needs, keep it’s confidential agreements safe, and live to fight another day. 

    Apple won’t have to pay the ransom Qualcomm says it’s owed since they did lose that case. I’m sure the agreement covers letting that go or accepting a smaller amount in order to settle this case. 

    So now, Apple has a 5G plan if it decides to use Qualcomm chips and the tech media can now stop creating fud about Apple’s 5G future. 
    Apple’s phones have been selling fine everywhere except for China (possibly India) and the slowdown in China is due to ongoing trade negotiations.
    tmay
  • Reply 70 of 127
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 2,112member
    elijahg said:
    sflocal said:
    avon b7 said:
    No doubt those who spouted so much vitriol against Qualcomm have mixed feelings now. QC was evil but now a different viewpoint will probably unfold.

    If the X55 ends up in the 2019 refresh, no doubt all the talk about 5G being unnecessary on the iPhone this year will be forgotten.

    I wonder how much of a factor the 5G modem really was in ending this issue (and how much Apple paid in the end).


    Ha... right.  Don't pat yourself on the back.  Qualcomm blinked...  Apple held all the cards.  I'm actually disappointed that Apple didn't take QC to the cleaners.  They certainly could have.  QC's attitude hasn't changed on bit and is still the evil little shit it's always been.

    Once QC realized it was in a courtroom, and actually having to fight is when QC raised the white flag. 
    Where did you get all this unsubstantiated nonsense? QC are bastards, and I'm also disappointed they settled. But nowhere is it suggested that they "raised the white flag."
    When they saw Huawei’s hand.
  • Reply 71 of 127
    sacto joesacto joe Posts: 895member
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    My guess is, Qualcomm finally put an offer on the table that dropped the "percentage of phone price" as the determinant of the cost of the chip.  But perhaps the price was higher than Apple would have insisted on had they won at trial, but it was lower than what they had been paying by enough to just end it.

    The details will be interesting though as I believe an in-house chip by Apple was coming within the next year or two.  Does this put that initiative on hold for six years, or does Apple retain the right to put its own chip in a certain percentage of iPhones just like they put Intel modems in a certain amount of them before?
    I think this is closer to the mark than "Qualcomm won, Apple lost". And if it's right, then Apple came out ahead in the medium and long term, while Qualcomm gets to live a while longer. 

    But I'll hold off on any more opinions for now. My go-to source is http://www.fosspatents.com and he hasn't weighed in on this yet.
    He'll be shocked as he's been convinced from the get-go that Apple intended to carry this thru to the end.  
    If that's what he expected, I'm surprised. I check in on what he's saying sometimes, usually when I can't find a filing or when I'm interested in something that I won't be able to find information on myself (e.g., with regard to the judicial proceedings in Germany).

    I thought it was likely that Qualcomm and Apple would eventually settle their disputes, and that it would be more likely that they did once this case and the FTC case were decided. I'm surprised that (if) he thought otherwise. Or did he just think that Apple would see the case which just went to trial (i.e. the one heard by Judge Curiel) through to the end before agreeing to settle?
    The latter. 
    Pure conjecture.
    Well of course, as are your comments. So?
    So what's your problem with waiting to find out more before making conjecture. I've already said I'll hold. You, on the other hand....
  • Reply 72 of 127
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,088member
    sacto joe said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    gatorguy said:
    carnegie said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    My guess is, Qualcomm finally put an offer on the table that dropped the "percentage of phone price" as the determinant of the cost of the chip.  But perhaps the price was higher than Apple would have insisted on had they won at trial, but it was lower than what they had been paying by enough to just end it.

    The details will be interesting though as I believe an in-house chip by Apple was coming within the next year or two.  Does this put that initiative on hold for six years, or does Apple retain the right to put its own chip in a certain percentage of iPhones just like they put Intel modems in a certain amount of them before?
    I think this is closer to the mark than "Qualcomm won, Apple lost". And if it's right, then Apple came out ahead in the medium and long term, while Qualcomm gets to live a while longer. 

    But I'll hold off on any more opinions for now. My go-to source is http://www.fosspatents.com and he hasn't weighed in on this yet.
    He'll be shocked as he's been convinced from the get-go that Apple intended to carry this thru to the end.  
    If that's what he expected, I'm surprised. I check in on what he's saying sometimes, usually when I can't find a filing or when I'm interested in something that I won't be able to find information on myself (e.g., with regard to the judicial proceedings in Germany).

    I thought it was likely that Qualcomm and Apple would eventually settle their disputes, and that it would be more likely that they did once this case and the FTC case were decided. I'm surprised that (if) he thought otherwise. Or did he just think that Apple would see the case which just went to trial (i.e. the one heard by Judge Curiel) through to the end before agreeing to settle?
    The latter. 
    Pure conjecture.
    Well of course, as are your comments. So?
    So what's your problem with waiting to find out more before making conjecture. I've already said I'll hold. You, on the other hand....
    Did you read thru the thread? EVERYONE is posting some conjecture...
    and guess what? They still will. Is that an issue for you? If so perhaps you shouldn't join in with statements like "Wow! Basically, Qualcomm blinked." A little conjecture from the kettle, but coming from you is OK, right?  LOL. ... 


    edited April 2019 MplsPchemenginradarthekatmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 73 of 127
    sacto joesacto joe Posts: 895member
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    My guess is, Qualcomm finally put an offer on the table that dropped the "percentage of phone price" as the determinant of the cost of the chip.  But perhaps the price was higher than Apple would have insisted on had they won at trial, but it was lower than what they had been paying by enough to just end it.

    The details will be interesting though as I believe an in-house chip by Apple was coming within the next year or two.  Does this put that initiative on hold for six years, or does Apple retain the right to put its own chip in a certain percentage of iPhones just like they put Intel modems in a certain amount of them before?
    I think this is closer to the mark than "Qualcomm won, Apple lost". And if it's right, then Apple came out ahead in the medium and long term, while Qualcomm gets to live a while longer. 

    But I'll hold off on any more opinions for now. My go-to source is http://www.fosspatents.com and he hasn't weighed in on this yet.
    He'll be shocked as he's been convinced from the get-go that Apple intended to carry this thru to the end.  
    As I said: Just pure conjecture on your part. And incorrect conjecture at that.

    From his latest posting:

    "This would have been a huge and extremely difficult case for the jury to decide. As always, I congratulate both parties on their deal, and in this case I think either side would have had to take quite some risk by letting a jury render a verdict on complex commercial and partly technical issues.

    Even though it ultimately didn't matter anymore what counsel said today, I really was impressed by Fish & Richardson's Ruffin Cordell's opening statement. One of the best explainers I ever got to listen to in a courtroom. I must admit I hadn't heard of him before, but probably will again, sooner or later.

    The terms of Apple's new deal with Qualcomm haven't been disclosed other than money flowing from Apple to Qualcomm, not the other way round (which could have happened after the trial in theory). Analysts will probably soon claim to know the exact numbers. We won't know whether they're right until something surfaces in future litigation."

    He who laughs last laughs best....

    edited April 2019
  • Reply 74 of 127
    sacto joesacto joe Posts: 895member
    The truth very well could be they both blinked. 

    Apple, who right now is fighting negative press that people are tired of the new iPhone and see no need to upgrade and will still hold on to their older devices. They aren’t, but the adoption of new iPhones is slower than it has been in the past. For some people, they are holding out to see what replaces the XS line. To them, the XR is not the new phone they want. They want the XS, but at a XR price. 

    Apple is also concerned that the reports of a lack of a 5G roadmap will push potential upgrades away from them, so a deal to them was the lesser of 2 evils. Better to deal with the devil you know vis-à-vis Samsung. They know how to do it. 

    There are other news reports that Samsung is fairing better with the Galaxy S10 line, although I doubt it. There are many ads where carriers are giving away s10s when you buy one. That can’t be a good sign. Samsung is putting on a brave face, but they know they are in the same boat trying to sell a $1k phone.  It’s going to get worse when their folding phone ships this month. 

    For Qualcomm the risk was much higher. If this trial was to go forward, all of their strongarm tactics will be unveiled. Apple was lining up all of its upper management to show just how long and far Qualcomm has gone to intimidate Apple and other manufacturers into using their chips. Internal documents could have been unsealed and the rest of the world could see just how underhanded Qualcomm operates. This is why Samsung and others did side with Apple against Qualcomm in other cases. 

    So rather than taking a huge gamble in proceeding with this suit, Qualcomm has agreed to take less money, provide Apple chips it needs, keep it’s confidential agreements safe, and live to fight another day. 

    Apple won’t have to pay the ransom Qualcomm says it’s owed since they did lose that case. I’m sure the agreement covers letting that go or accepting a smaller amount in order to settle this case. 

    So now, Apple has a 5G plan if it decides to use Qualcomm chips and the tech media can now stop creating fud about Apple’s 5G future. 
    Conjecture piled on conjecture. If you really knew what Apple was concerned with, you'd be working for them, and you wouldn't be posting here.
    edited April 2019
  • Reply 75 of 127
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,088member
    sacto joe said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    My guess is, Qualcomm finally put an offer on the table that dropped the "percentage of phone price" as the determinant of the cost of the chip.  But perhaps the price was higher than Apple would have insisted on had they won at trial, but it was lower than what they had been paying by enough to just end it.

    The details will be interesting though as I believe an in-house chip by Apple was coming within the next year or two.  Does this put that initiative on hold for six years, or does Apple retain the right to put its own chip in a certain percentage of iPhones just like they put Intel modems in a certain amount of them before?
    I think this is closer to the mark than "Qualcomm won, Apple lost". And if it's right, then Apple came out ahead in the medium and long term, while Qualcomm gets to live a while longer. 

    But I'll hold off on any more opinions for now. My go-to source is http://www.fosspatents.com and he hasn't weighed in on this yet.
    He'll be shocked as he's been convinced from the get-go that Apple intended to carry this thru to the end.  
    As I said: Just pure conjecture on your part. And incorrect conjecture at that.

    From his latest posting:

    "This would have been a huge and extremely difficult case for the jury to decide. As always, I congratulate both parties on their deal, and in this case I think either side would have had to take quite some risk by letting a jury render a verdict on complex commercial and partly technical issues.

    Even though it ultimately didn't matter anymore what counsel said today, I really was impressed by Fish & Richardson's Ruffin Cordell's opening statement. One of the best explainers I ever got to listen to in a courtroom. I must admit I hadn't heard of him before, but probably will again, sooner or later.

    The terms of Apple's new deal with Qualcomm haven't been disclosed other than money flowing from Apple to Qualcomm, not the other way round (which could have happened after the trial in theory). Analysts will probably soon claim to know the exact numbers. We won't know whether they're right until something surfaces in future litigation."

    He who laughs last laughs best....

    I'm shocked he's not more shocked. :)
  • Reply 76 of 127
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    Part of the pressure was the threat of Apple building their own chipset. So, QCOM likely blinked. But, so did Apple with no 5G iPhone until at least 2021. 
  • Reply 77 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    My guess is, Qualcomm finally put an offer on the table that dropped the "percentage of phone price" as the determinant of the cost of the chip.  But perhaps the price was higher than Apple would have insisted on had they won at trial, but it was lower than what they had been paying by enough to just end it.

    The details will be interesting though as I believe an in-house chip by Apple was coming within the next year or two.  Does this put that initiative on hold for six years, or does Apple retain the right to put its own chip in a certain percentage of iPhones just like they put Intel modems in a certain amount of them before?
    I think that is a pretty good guess.   A lot of it, I think was Apple correctly surmised that Qualcomm was using them to subsidize the cheap phones.
    taugust04_ai
  • Reply 78 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    wood1208 said:
    Apple desperately needed the 5G chips unless they wanted to take a serious hit in their primary money making product.

    But, I wish they had gone with Huawei rather than Qualcomm -- Huawei has better ethics and is more trustworthy.
    Are you paid by Chinese government ? I would switch to Samsung if Apple ever use Huawei chips.
    No, I just don't drink the Administration's KoolAid.
  • Reply 79 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    sacto joe said:
    Wow! Basically, Qualcomm blinked. This is going to be a positive for AAPL's price....although maybe the word had leaked out some time ago, and that would explain the big push upward for AAPL lately. Was this the worst kept secret in the world?

    Inquiring minds want to know…

    Early stock response has been very muted for Apple , but QC is up significantly. 
    Qualcomm had much more to lose than Apple, and Apple's stock already has the iPhone 2019 priced in without 5G.
    Hopefully Apple never uses their stock price as a basis for business decisions.   Many lesser companies do that.  Hopefully Apple never falls to that level.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 80 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    avon b7 said:
    dt17 said:
    avon b7 said:
    No doubt those who spouted so much vitriol against Qualcomm have mixed feelings now. QC was evil but now a different viewpoint will probably unfold.

    If the X55 ends up in the 2019 refresh, no doubt all the talk about 5G being unnecessary on the iPhone this year will be forgotten.

    I wonder how much of a factor the 5G modem really was in ending this issue (and how much Apple paid in the end).


    And if the X55 doesn’t end up in 2019 refresh? Will you buy each of us here an iPhone?
    No. LOL

    The 'if' part is there for that reason. The point being that it will be interesting to see what ends up in the 2019 refresh. If it is the X55 it would lend weight to the idea that Apple was in need of a 5G offering this year.
    Is there a law that Apple can release a new phone or a refresh once a year in September?

    I would be VERY disappointed in Tim if he held off on a 5G phone until Sept 2020 because the Sept 2019 refresh was already set.  Actually, now would be a GREAT time to end that stupidity:   Instead of focusing on simply putting out the world's greatest products, they have this show once a year where the biggest question is always whether Apple succeeded or failed - rather than the worthiness of the product.
    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.