Apple and Qualcomm Reach Settlement, Agree to Drop All Litigation

[macfacts]

Oh, so double dipping in the reverse order make it legal? That's quite the leap...

What law is broken by selling the license first then the hardware (aka no license, no chips)?

 

[FFR]

What law is broken by selling the license first then the hardware (aka no license, no chips)?

Because no license no chips, that’s double dipping. You know the whole point of the trial.

 

[realtuner]

What law is broken by selling the license first then the hardware (aka no license, no chips)?

@cmaier has already answered this, numerous times (in this thread and others). Patent exhaustion.

You apparently want to ignore all the facts around this case and stick to your "Apple bad, therefore they must be wrong" mentality.

You really should change your username.

 

[jonnysods]

I hope that helps us in the long run - which I think it will.

 

[mikethemartian]

Willing to bet that Qualcomm took a lot less to just get something. Rather than chance not getting anything.

I’m willing to bet the other way.

 

[Kabeyun]

Get a room guys.

They did. A court room. And that prospect seemed to be just the motivation they needed to work it out. Good for us. Glory be!

 

[5105973]

Whatever whatever, I don't care about either company and their dramas...I'll just be happy to get the best possible modem back in my iPhone. My Intel modem in my Xr is good enough, but my Qualcomm based Android phones have been performing much better in the outlying service area I live in.

Anyway, this is good news for me as a customer.

 

[tridley68]

Qualcomm would have been doomed and they finally realized that Apple didn't really need them after all .

 

[InfoTime]

This is good news. I have little confidence in Intel provide communications chips. They were reportedly slower in iPhones and for cable modems had problems where Broadcom chips were the gold standard... see Intel Puma 6 debacle.

 

[teknishn]

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.

Samsung phones with the latest QCOM SoCs spank Samsung’s latest chip. You are correct, though, for all prior generations.

 

[JGIGS]

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 $

I think they want there chips in general. From what I've understood the are far superior to Intel's.

 

[Glideslope]

Finally! Now ditch those $hi!!y Intel chips and get back to business. And focus on a ARM processor so you can also dump these garbage overly hot and inneficient intel X86 chips and move us to ARM processing! Power PC to Intel take two!

I like your roadmap.

 

[Intellectua1]

Lol. Qualcomm caved because under exhaustion law their business model would have been toast.

I highly doubt Qualcomm caved, I bet it's more that Apple realized they really screwed up and decided to make it right. Either way this is a win for Qualcomm

 

[jamezr]

Whatever whatever, I don't care about either company and their dramas...I'll just be happy to get the best possible modem back in my iPhone. My Intel modem in my Xr is good enough, but my Qualcomm based Android phones have been performing much better in the outlying service area I live in.

Anyway, this is good news for me as a customer.

and that is why Apple caved and Qualcomm won..... The Intel modems were not quite as good as Qualcomm. Then with 5G right around the corner....Apple say the writing on the wall. Intel was never going to be able to match the speed and quality of the Qualcomm chips.

 

[Roy]

Curious, what about your 7 Plus "can not survive much longer"?

Also curious here! I have a 7 Plus and it’s still going strong. Best cellphone I’ve ever had. And I use it extensively since my 2009 Mac Program stopped working about 6 months ago. I got a $29 dollar battery replacement in October 2018, so I’m good on battery until the 2020s come out.

 

[hans1972]

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 $

Apple never meant to pay nothing, they wanted a reduced price and especially a pricing structure which was not based on a percentage.

Apple has been playing this game for 10+ years now, starting with Nokia, trying to devalue SEP and paying less to the inventors of wireless technology. And I think they have been pretty successful.

 

[Brandon916]

Apple caved.

If Apple really believed Qualcomm's patents were unfair, they would have fought this to the end. Instead, Apple just signed a 6 year licensing deal with Qualcomm, "including a two-year option to extend, and a multiyear chipset supply agreement."

Damn, Applefanboy are so blinded by apple they have a hard time reading simple english.

 

[Glideslope]

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

Precisely. Apple is paying a fair fee now. We will eventually find out the fees. I’m glad this was resolved. There is no QC won, AAPL won. The consumer wins.

I find the 2yr option interesting. We could easily see TSMC producing an Apple Designed 5G Modem within 6 years. Or perhaps Apple has scaled back their Modem development?

Interesting times ahead.

 

[macfacts]

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

Apple doesn't buy anything from Qualcomm. Apple buys from Foxconn and other factories. It is the factories that pay Qualcomm. Foxconn was licensing from Qualcomm before iPhone. That means Foxconn felt it was a fair price.

Here comes apple and uses their strength to bully Foxconn to stop paying Qualcomm.

 

[Brandon916]

Qualcomm stock is up more than Apple's because Apple was suing Qualcomm, they were very likely to win, and Qualcomm's existence were in perils. An agreement means Apple already got what they wanted without risking to lose, and without forcing Qualcomm to go nearly bankrupt.

How much did Apple pay you to suck them so hard. Geez. Qualcomm ain't going anywhere especially since all the major phone manufacture going to need their 5G chip.

 

[MadDawg2020]

The best part is Huawei gets nothing and is no longer an option to supply 5G chips - errr umm I mean spyware for future iPhones.

 

[Doomtomb]

 

[Mike MA]

One annoying topic less around here.

 

[Intellectua1]

Funny how people here think Qualcomm needs Apple when it's the other way around. Qualcomm supplies chips for EVERY Android phone, Apple has stopped using Qualcomm a few times and QC never skipped a beat. Apple/Intel would have to pay Qualcomm regardless because Qualcomm owns the tech Apple needs. You guys are very delusional! I'll also like to add that before this trial started everybody talked so hard that 5G wouldn't be ready by 2020 so you all didn't care anyway but now all of a sudden 5G in the 2020 iPhone matters? We all knew it did whether the rollout was complete or not. The delusional ones did not. This is a win win for Qualcomm, Apple caved and it shows Qualcomm has superior technology which means more sales for QC

 

[macfacts]

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?

Qualcomm doesn't sell licenses to Intel, so how does patent exhaustion apply to chips Intel sells using Qualcomm's patents?

Qualcomm doesn't sell their chips unless the customer buys a license first, so how does patent exhaustion apply in this case?