Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/ftc-files-suit-against-qualcomm.8874/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

FTC files suit against Qualcomm

My understanding is that the main allegation behind the suit is not that Qualcomm is charging an unfair price for it's royalties, but that it's refusing to sell it's chips to companies that don't pay them royalties. Doesn't really make sense to me. If that's the case, FTC would have to prove that Qualcomm has a monopoly on baseband chips, which is easily refutable.
 
It's kind of a badge of honor to be accused of Monopolistic behaviors, just look at all of the other tech companies that were accused of the same thing: Intel, Microsoft, Micron, Samsung, Apple, Nokia, etc.
 
So on the one hand, you have the FTC claiming Qualcomm made a sweetheart deal with Apple to stifle competition, and on the other you have Apple suing Qualcomm of allegedly charging excessive royalties.
 
It's never a good sign when a Qualcomm customer like Apple withholds $1B in payments and makes a public stink about it. I always thought that polite companies negotiate in private, not in the press.
 
Daniel Payne said:
It's never a good sign when a Qualcomm customer like Apple withholds $1B in payments and makes a public stink about it. I always thought that polite companies negotiate in private, not in the press.
Click to expand...
You got it the wrong way around. Qualcomm withheld 1 billion in rebates that they owed Apple, in retaliation for Apple co-operating with the Korean authorities.
This has been a long time coming. Qualcomm has always used their patents to muscle out competition in the market. I hope they get more than a hand slap this time.
 
I believe the suit is based on at least two subjects: "standard essential patents" and "licensed on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms".

"Standard essential patents" means a standard organization established a international standard, such LTE, CDMA, that requires certain patents to be used in order to be fully complied with the particular standard. In exchange the patent holders agree to license their patents to anyone in a "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms". It will make no any sense if the international standard organization, for example International Telecommunication Union (ITU), will set a standard to a allow Qualcomm a free realm to make whatever amount of money Qualcomm decided.

One thing gets Qualcomm in trouble is they demand the patent fees based on the whole handset price, not just the Qualcomm chip's price.

We all know today's smartphones provide so much features and usefulness because it can take great pictures and videos, can understand what you think and ask, can identify you by your face or fingerprints, and can run many apps to improve the life of a human being. Most of those features have little or no relationship with Qualcomm's patents. To me, Qualcomm patent license fees calculated on the entire phone's price is not a "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory" practice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top