ronn

The fine is a joke, thus the Democratic members opposition. From The NY Times:

But none of the conditions in the settlement will impose strict limitations on Facebook’s ability to collect and share data with third parties. And that decision appeared to help split the five-member commission. The 3-to-2 vote, taken in secret this week, drew the dissent of the two Democrats on the commission because they sought stricter limits on the company, the people said.

There were calls for Zuckerberg to be personally liable given his role at the company and because a similar settlement in 2011 did nothing to curb Facebook’s bad behavior. Especially with no additional oversight. Suck lied to members of Congress when he appeared before them. The first poster is right: the fine is a fraction of what it should be 

The US thinks short term and reactionary. China has been thinking long-term and will weather any "pain" the Imbecile-in-Chief thinks he's inflicting.

The iPhone may be safe, for now. But again, China is thinking long-term. Chinese firms are in a position to overtake Apple internally. The Chinese government has far stronger support for its efforts than the US -- it's baked-in for totalitarian regimes.

If the merged company is saddled with too many concessions, it will doom its chances against AT&T and Verizon. All three carriers (assuming the merger is eventually allowed) should have penalties and givebacks for failing to implement 5G in a timely and cost effective fashion. 

1STnTENDERBITS said:

ronn said:

gatorguy said:

red oak said:

wanderso said:

Seems that Apple might have wanted to wait a few more weeks to settle. 

It will take many months to work through the appeals process.  And the outcome is not guaranteed.  Apple needed the chips now 

But as long as the FTC wins at the end, it will not matter.   The contract will get torn up 

I don't see that happening. 

Doesn't the ruling mandate that:

"...Qualcomm must negotiate or renegotiate license terms with customers in good faith under conditions free from the threat of lack of access to or discriminatory provision of modem chip supply or associated technical support or access to software."

Which could give Apple a leg up on redoing the contract.

Negotiate - From a go-forward perspective.  Renegotiate - if terms were negotiated under bad faith and threats.  There's nothing available that says Apple and QC negotiated their agreement under bad faith or threats.  In fact, there's a fair contingent of AI forum members who insist it was Apple negotiating from a position of strength so the conditions for renegotiation weren't really present.  We don't know so we can't assume.  Regardless, that excerpt you quoted does not mandate renegotiation.

Everything in Koh's ruling points to Qualcomm operating under bad faith. Hell, she stopped just short of calling Q's witnesses/executive perjurers. They lost on nearly every count and she mandated government oversight for a period of seven years. The parties are holding the contract close to their vests, so no one can say with definitive proof who won. But given the previous worldwide rulings against Qualcomm, this outcome and the upcoming German trials, Qualcomm will be in a world of hurt.

gatorguy said:

red oak said:

wanderso said:

Seems that Apple might have wanted to wait a few more weeks to settle. 

It will take many months to work through the appeals process.  And the outcome is not guaranteed.  Apple needed the chips now 

But as long as the FTC wins at the end, it will not matter.   The contract will get torn up 

I don't see that happening.