Qualcomm seeks court order forcing Apple suppliers to pay royalties amid legal dispute

Posted:
in General Discussion edited May 2017
As part of an ongoing patent licensing dispute with Apple, Qualcomm on Wednesday requested a court order stipulating that Apple contract manufacturers maintain royalty payments during the legal process.




News of the court request arrives from Axios, which obtained a statement on today's proceedings from Qualcomm's general counsel Don Rosenberg.

"We are confident that our contracts will be found valid and enforceable but in the interim it is only fair and equitable that our licensees pay for the property they are using," Rosenberg said.

Last month, Qualcomm revealed an unspecified number of contract manufacturers using Qualcomm IP to build hardware bound for Apple products were withholding royalty payments. Certain suppliers continue to underpay royalties in amounts equal to those Qualcomm had not paid Apple under previously arranged licensing rebate deals.

In a lawsuit leveled in January, Apple accused Qualcomm of unfair licensing terms, saying the firm withheld nearly $1 billion in rebates in retaliation for participating in a South Korean antitrust investigation.

At the heart of Apple's suit are claims against Qualcomm's business practices, which the iPhone maker describes as monopolistic. Apple alleges Qualcomm abuses its "monopoly power" of the mobile wireless chip market to flout FRAND (fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory) patent commitments to charge customers exorbitant royalty rates on standard-essential patents. Qualcomm also restricts sales to buyers who have agreed to license its SEPs, a practice Apple refers to as "double-dipping."

Those accusations mirror certain claims addressed in a U.S. Federal Trade Commission antitrust lawsuit also lodged in January.

For its part, Qualcomm claims Apple is interfering with its contract manufacturers, and to that end filed an amended counterclaim on Wednesday that provides further evidence of such tampering. Qualcomm initially outlined its case in a countersuit in April.

Along with allegations relating to hardware suppliers, Qualcomm asserts Apple is in breach of contract and has in the past wrongly induced regulatory action in a number of jurisdictions. The original counterclaim cited 35 specific defenses to Apple's January allegations. Qualcomm asserts that Apple has not suffered tangible injury, antitrust or otherwise, from Qualcomm's business practices.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    ericthehalfbeeericthehalfbee Posts: 4,021member
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    anton zuykovmattinozjbdragon
  • Reply 2 of 14
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,556member
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 

    Indeed.

    It's a tricky one though. With their payments being withheld then Qualcomm will be forced to get this resolved as soon as possible. If folk are still paying then their best bet is to keep the whole thing tied up in the courts for the next decade.

    But the same can also be said for Apple; this non-payment thing will suit them for as long as possible, though knowing how Apple works, the money they're withholding will be accounted for and held in case they lose the case. They can't do anything with the money until this is resolved, so a speedy solution is really in their best interest as well, I think.
  • Reply 3 of 14
    rotateleftbyterotateleftbyte Posts: 1,042member
    They could offer to put the money in escrow pending the outcome of the case.
    That seems to be acceptable in many cases.

    radarthekat
  • Reply 4 of 14
    saltyzipsaltyzip Posts: 193member
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


  • Reply 5 of 14
    anton zuykovanton zuykov Posts: 1,031member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    What are you on? Is that.. (cough).... medicine even legal or was it just an overdoze?
    Qualcomm conjured some weird scheme of how royalties are paid, yet it is somehow Apple's fault?
    radarthekatlkruppmwhitecharlesatlasboredumbmattinoz
  • Reply 6 of 14
    brakkenbrakken Posts: 677member
    In other new today, failing network chip monopolist Qualcomm today shot its last remaining foot after licking the bore of the shotgun. Pledging a hopefulnes reminiscent of Sleeping Beauty, QC akwardly backhanded every last company that may have allied with it, ensuring emnity over the company's few remaining years of solubility from the entire industry. 

    Not willing to eat any humble pie and make amends, QC council is insistent the company's determination to double-charge is in its partner's interests. At the time of the report, there was much giggling heard behind the closed doors of Apple's legal team offices. 
    radarthekat2old4funanton zuykov
  • Reply 7 of 14
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    No need for me to do it...since your hoof is so far down your gullet, you can kick your own butt. 
    radarthekatanton zuykovlongpath
  • Reply 8 of 14
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 854member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    Unclean hands.  Qualcomm is withholding payments, Apple did the same after (which in many books would be in response).   The only just action that a judge could do is to have both companies place these disputed / fee payments put into escrow until the case is permanently closed...  It would give an additional incentive to settle the case rather than drag it out (SCO I think is still not absolutely and completely closed).

    In fact anyone in the same position should be treated the same way....  It would act as an incentive to not drag things out while not being enough to shutter the business before their case is heard.  If either party starts dragging it out then the payments their escrow account would be shut down and they would lose their leverage.
    edited May 2017 radarthekat
  • Reply 9 of 14
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,476member
    Which court is Qcom asking, a US court?

     If so a US court has no jurisdiction over a non US based company. Apple's contractors generally do not do business in the US, except Foxconn. I suspect Qcom needs to go to Tawain and China to make these demands, the problem Qcom has they do not have operations in those countries so they are not going to be inclined to help much.

    Does anyone know which court they are asking.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,784member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    What are you on? Is that.. (cough).... medicine even legal or was it just an overdoze?
    Qualcomm conjured some weird scheme of how royalties are paid, yet it is somehow Apple's fault?
    How the mind of an Apple hater works has always been mysterious. Psychologists have been baffled by the syndrome for decades.
    anton zuykov
  • Reply 11 of 14
    rob55rob55 Posts: 1,254member
    lkrupp said:
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    What are you on? Is that.. (cough).... medicine even legal or was it just an overdoze?
    Qualcomm conjured some weird scheme of how royalties are paid, yet it is somehow Apple's fault?
    How the mind of an Apple hater works has always been mysterious. Psychologists have been baffled by the syndrome for decades.
    We can all rest easy. Saltyzip has determined that Apple makes more than enough money off of their devices, and that it's ok for Qualcomm to abuse their SEPs. FRAND be damned.
  • Reply 12 of 14
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    Someone who knows nothing and talks again hey, seems like a pattern with you.
  • Reply 13 of 14
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,157member
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    So its wrong of Apple for not paying exorbitant royalty payments? Do you happen to work for Qualcomm? 
  • Reply 14 of 14
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,696member
    rob55 said:
    lkrupp said:
    saltyzip said:
    The reduction in cash flow must hurt. 
    Yep, this is just wrong by Apple.

    They are using their power to bully supplier's.

    Apple make more than enough money off their devices and by threatening suppliers to reduce costs with only one aim to make them even more money to feed the share price rise, it makes me sick. Hope Apple get shackled with huge fine on this one and it tarnishes their reputation too.


    What are you on? Is that.. (cough).... medicine even legal or was it just an overdoze?
    Qualcomm conjured some weird scheme of how royalties are paid, yet it is somehow Apple's fault?
    How the mind of an Apple hater works has always been mysterious. Psychologists have been baffled by the syndrome for decades.
    We can all rest easy. Saltyzip has determined that Apple makes more than enough money off of their devices, and that it's ok for Qualcomm to abuse their SEPs. FRAND be damned.
    Which standards body is responsible for CDMA?
    Is this really a standards technology or a proprietary technology.




Sign In or Register to comment.