Apple and Qualcomm Reach Settlement, Agree to Drop All Litigation

[apolloa]

The only thing that ANYONE here REALLY cares about, is if this means Qualcomm modems in the iPhone again...

Hmm I’ll be looking at a new one in 2020 so here’s hoping.

 

[realtuner]

If Qualcomm sold Intel a license, patent exhaustion would apply .... And even so, apple would be using a poor implementation from Intel.

Wait, you're arguing with a patent lawyer who also used to design processors?

I think I know whose opinion I'll consider in all matters related to Qualcomm/Apple.

 

[falainber]

And if 2020 iPhones still have intel modems will you admit you were wrong.

Intel might not even have a modem in 2020. That's the problem for Apple. If Intel (or Netflix or whomever) releases better modems that Qualcomm in time for 2020 model release then suere Apple may prefer those but this guessing is pointless because right now the only two choices of 5G modems for 2020 iPhone models Apple has are Qualcomm and Huawei.

 

[MX20]

The whole lawsuit case is for the sake of increasing profit per device and if the modem ever develops by Apple can integrate into A series SOC will undoubtedly be more cost effective than using Qualcomm chipset.

 

[macfacts]

Apple never said they owed nothing to Qualcomm. They argued that what QC was asking was too much and unfair.

And what exactly was apples evidence that it was too much or unfair? Everyone else pays Qualcomm the same. Qualcomm says they have over 300 customers. That seems like everyone else is saying the price is fair.

 

[cmaier]

Qualcomm sells the license first, then sells the hardware. Not the other way around.

The order does not matter. When you sell a product to someone, you lose monopoly rights over the product. Qualcomm was claiming they had patent monopoly rights still and that Apple needed a license to use the very chips they got from Qualcomm. They needed no such license because the sales of the chips from Qualcomm were authorized sales.
[doublepost=1555444422][/doublepost]

And what exactly was apples evidence that it was too much or unfair? Everyone else pays Qualcomm the same. Qualcomm says they have over 300 customers. That seems like everyone else is saying the price is fair.

No, not everyone else pays them the same. And many customers complained.

 

[strategicthinke]

QCOM stock is up 16%. AAPL has not moved. Who do you think has won?

Market cap. Something like this means a lot to a smaller company such as QCOM. It couldn’t mean less to a company as large as AAPL.
Stocks Market 101.

 

[cmaier]

I am not sure many people will believe you after statements like that

They would if they knew who I was, as many in these forums do.

 

[realtuner]

My XS Max was intended to be a 4-5 year phone. It looks like I'll get the first iPhone that was new Qualcomm modems/chips. FU Intel.

...and let's be honest - Apple was at fault here and their greed was on full display. This thing didn't even last 72 hours.

Better contact all the courts around the world (which I've summarized above) and tell them they were all wrong and that Qualcomm never did anything wrong with how they licensed their IP.

And remember, the FTC decision is still to come. Apparently Qualcomm is negotiating that to arrange a settlement as well. If that happens, who loses? The FTC or Qualcomm?

 

[decypher44]

My XS Max was intended to be a 4-5 year phone. It looks like I'll get the first iPhone that was new Qualcomm modems/chips. FU Intel.

...and let's be honest - Apple was at fault here and their greed was on full display. This thing didn't even last 72 hours.

Same here! I want to toss this XSMax into the ocean and get something with some Q in it. And, no, I don’t want to go backward. I can hang on for a while.

 

[kahkityoong]

This can only be good news

Not for Intel

 

[djphat2000]

More like Apple wanted to get something so they stopped litigation.
A six year license agreement with a two year option at the end.
Apple paying Qualcomm.

Qualcomm stock up more than Apple.
best outcome for both. Stop paying the lawyers and tying up the courts.

Market cap for Qualcomm is about $70 billion. Apple is at about $943 billion. I wouldn't exactly say their stock is up more than Apples.
The agreement is good for both. And it's most likely not at the same "terms" that existed before this whole thing went down.
And don't think for one minute Apple isn't coming up with plans to make their own chips at the end of the day. 6 years maybe enough for Apple and intel to make a new chip, or for Apple to just make their own.

 

[Smoothie]

I love how everyone claims to know who "caved." Patent license agreements are generally lengthy and confidential, so unless you were involved in the settlement negotiations, you have no knowledge of the specific terms that each party agreed to -- except for the general press release that was approved by the parties.

Most patent cases settle because patent litigation is very risky for both parties -- especially when a jury of lay people is being asked to decide questions about complicated technology. So this was a smart decision by both Qualcomm and Apple.

 

[strategicthinke]

And what exactly was apples evidence that it was too much or unfair? Everyone else pays Qualcomm the same. Qualcomm says they have over 300 customers. That seems like everyone else is saying the price is fair.

Have you realised that Samsung’s Exyos processors are better than QCOM’s Snapdragon? And have yo realised that they only ship Galaxy phones with Snapdragons in the USA? That’s how much QCOM’s royalties charge impact Samsung users. Lucky are consumers in Europe where they can actually buy a Samsung phone with a GOOD processor instead of QCOM’s underwhelming Snapdragons.

 

[cmaier]

If Qualcomm sold Intel a license, patent exhaustion would apply .... And even so, apple would be using a poor implementation from Intel.

I don’t even know what you’re trying to say with the first part of your sentence. If Qualcomm sold intel a license, then, yes, purchasers of Intel’s chips would need no license. Just as when Qualcomm sells its own chips that substantially embody the patents, the purchasers need no license. What’s your point?

 

[FFR]

Intel might not even have a modem in 2020. That's the problem for Apple. If Intel (or Netflix or whomever) releases better modems that Qualcomm in time for 2020 model release then suere Apple may prefer those but this guessing is pointless because right now the only two choices of 5G modems for 2020 iPhone models Apple has are Qualcomm and Huawei.

But intel does have a 5g modem and we will know next year if 2020 iPhones will have an intel and or Qualcomm modem.

This trial wasn’t about 5g modems. It was about double dipping on royalty payments, and Qualcomm was never going to win it. Simple really.

 

[realtuner]

And what exactly was apples evidence that it was too much or unfair? Everyone else pays Qualcomm the same. Qualcomm says they have over 300 customers. That seems like everyone else is saying the price is fair.

And yet in the previous FTC case, numerous smartphone companies besides Apple testified on behalf of the FTC regarding Qualcomm's licensing practices.

I know you'd like to make this about Apple and Qualcomm, but it's really the entire world and all the major smartphone companies against Qualcomm.

 

[cmaier]

But intel does have a 5g modem and we will know next year if 2020 iPhones will have an intel and or Qualcomm modem.

This trial wasn’t about 5g modems. It was about double dipping on royalty payments, and Qualcomm was never going to win it. Simple really.

exactly. The only part of the case that was in question was whether charging a royalty based on a percentage of the overall device cost is “non-discriminatory” and “reasonable.” We won’t find out for now, I guess.

 

[CarpalMac]

Credit where credit is due, this couldn't have happened without Infinite Vortex (Sort of!)

 

[MoreRumors?]

With the settlement, now both companies can move forward. I am sure Intel just felt more heat with the possibility their modem may not be used on any iPhones especially for the 5G. If Qualcomm modem are still the best available, then this is what I want.

 

[FFR]

exactly. The only part of the case that was in question was whether charging a royalty based on a percentage of the overall device cost is “non-discriminatory” and “reasonable.” We won’t find out for now, I guess.

Tell me about it. It’s pretty cut and dry.

 

[djphat2000]

QCOM stock is up 16%. AAPL has not moved. Who do you think has won?

I compare $943 billion to $70 and say Apple wins.

 

[FFR]

I compare $943 billion to $70 and say Apple wins.

Hahaha, can’t argue with numbers.

 

[bayelrey80]

So Apple agreed to pay for the patents like they should have from the beginning? Maybe Qualcomm gave them a slight discount?

What this comes down to is Apple really wanted those Qualcomm 5G wireless chips and Qualcomm really wanted Apple's $

Yessir. It's better they did business tbh. Qualcomm desperately needs the business and Apple needs that 5G modem action. I guess Intel loses in the end lol

 

[twolf2919]

QCOM stock is up 16%. AAPL has not moved. Who do you think has won?

AAPL? QCOM rose (back to pre-suit days) because a huge risk came off its shoulders. AAPL's shoulders/stock barely shrugged as it didn't have much to gain or lose.