Apple claims recent Supreme Court ruling makes Qualcomm iPhone IP agreement invalid
Apple has escalated its legal attack on Qualcomm, declaring the iPhone broadband chip license agreement is invalid, and the manufacturer is illegally double-dipping in its demand for a royalty payment for chip technology in conjunction with charging for the chips.
First reported by Reuters, Apple is utilizing a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that put tighter restrictions on manufacturers to control how products are used or resold. Apple argues that Qualcomm is entitled to only "one reward" rather than reaping profit on the sale of the broadband, and take a percentage of the iPhone selling price from the intellectual property license.
The formal buyers of the broadband chips are Apple's manufacturers -- which then pass the costs on to Apple. As part of the filing, Apple has asked the court to stop Qualcomm's lawsuits against Foxconn, and three other manufacturers.
The lawsuit that started the battle was filed in January, with Apple accusing Qualcomm of unfair licensing terms. Apple claims that Qualcomm withheld nearly $1 billion in rebates in retaliation for participating in a South Korean antitrust investigation.
Apple alleges Qualcomm abuses its "monopoly power" of the mobile wireless chip market to skirt fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) patent commitments to charge customers exorbitant royalty rates. Qualcomm also restricts sales of chips to buyers who have agreed to license its SEPs, a practice Apple refers to as "double-dipping" -- the point hammered home in the court filing on Monday.
Those accusations mirror certain claims addressed in a U.S. Federal Trade Commission antitrust lawsuit also lodged in January.
More recently, In April, Qualcomm revealed contract manufacturers using Qualcomm technologies to Apple product components were withholding royalty payments at Apple's behest.
Qualcomm denies all of Apple's assertions and claims that Apple is interfering with its contract manufacturers. Qualcomm initially outlined its case in a countersuit also in April.
In its myriad counter-complaints, Qualcomm has declared that Apple is in breach of contract. Qualcomm asserts that Apple has not suffered tangible injury, antitrust or otherwise, from Qualcomm's business practices.
First reported by Reuters, Apple is utilizing a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that put tighter restrictions on manufacturers to control how products are used or resold. Apple argues that Qualcomm is entitled to only "one reward" rather than reaping profit on the sale of the broadband, and take a percentage of the iPhone selling price from the intellectual property license.
The formal buyers of the broadband chips are Apple's manufacturers -- which then pass the costs on to Apple. As part of the filing, Apple has asked the court to stop Qualcomm's lawsuits against Foxconn, and three other manufacturers.
The lawsuit that started the battle was filed in January, with Apple accusing Qualcomm of unfair licensing terms. Apple claims that Qualcomm withheld nearly $1 billion in rebates in retaliation for participating in a South Korean antitrust investigation.
Apple alleges Qualcomm abuses its "monopoly power" of the mobile wireless chip market to skirt fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) patent commitments to charge customers exorbitant royalty rates. Qualcomm also restricts sales of chips to buyers who have agreed to license its SEPs, a practice Apple refers to as "double-dipping" -- the point hammered home in the court filing on Monday.
Those accusations mirror certain claims addressed in a U.S. Federal Trade Commission antitrust lawsuit also lodged in January.
More recently, In April, Qualcomm revealed contract manufacturers using Qualcomm technologies to Apple product components were withholding royalty payments at Apple's behest.
Qualcomm denies all of Apple's assertions and claims that Apple is interfering with its contract manufacturers. Qualcomm initially outlined its case in a countersuit also in April.
In its myriad counter-complaints, Qualcomm has declared that Apple is in breach of contract. Qualcomm asserts that Apple has not suffered tangible injury, antitrust or otherwise, from Qualcomm's business practices.
Comments
Qualcomm charges for the chip, then charges a fee to actually USE the chip?
Is that correct?
That doesn't mean recent legal rulings will allow that to go on, but it was never deemed illegal when the basis was established. It's relatively common as a matter of fact. Of course Qualcomm is quite aggressive in their demands and I don't think there's any way they'll be allowed to continue as is.
Buying a chip to install in a piece of hardware is a different thing entirely. It's sold and used and that's it. There is no "service' after the sell. Unless Qualcomm has some arrangement to keep firmware current in sold chips, that Qualcomm chip is a widget. Done.
Not really. Whatever firmware/microcode that may be embedded in the chip drives the radio circuits (3G, LTE, etc.) and has nothing to do with the functionality of iOS, which is all application-level features.
It's like claiming that you need to load new firmware into your Mac's Wi-Fi chip whenever macOS gets updated. Although it may be theoretically possible to update this firmware, I've never heard of it ever happening. The device drivers that go between the chip and the OS frequently need to be updated, but never the code running inside the chip itself.
EDIT: So Qualcomm does apparently do a baseband firmware update as needed to be bundled in with a new iOS version update.