Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What a shocker... yet ANOTHER court case against a big company and supplier to Apple, Apple settled out of court with right before they got ripped apart in the court room..

Said it before, will say it again, this is nothing more then Apples business MO and it’s way to bring supplier costs down to the bare bone, but it seems to consistently lose? However I bet a million bucks they now have reduced costs to pay Qualcomm.

Perhaps they’ll use their modems again now?

Funny. Do you think China, South Korea, Taiwan and the EU are in Apples pocket? They all went after Qualcomm over licensing practices. Were they all trying to lower their supply costs too?
 
Qualcomm caved and is getting RAND with an additional contract of 7 years stability. That's the reason the stock is up. They dropped all of their double/triple dipping and you can bet a precedent has been set.

LOL. I would love for my company to be up 20% in value in 1 day by "caving". I would cave every day!
 
I don't think you know Apple that well. They will wait, think MacPro modular. They are not in any rush for anything they deem important. This was a big enough deal for them to go to intel for a completely inferior modem over. As long as it connects and gives you decent speed. They will put it in their flagship phone, and wait out Qualcomm. Which they did.
And for their efforts, they get a 6 year +2 deal. And most likely, MUCH more favorable terms going forward.


All I said was that "Apple wanted something so they stopped litigation".
I said what I meant. You read too much into that statement. It doesn't imply any terms.
Apple may have wanted a reliable modem supply for 5G. I don't know.
I just know they saw something they wanted and a 6 year + 2 year option gives them that at a price they liked.
My statement doesn't say anything more or less.
 
Sure I can. I can do whatever I want.

And since I know patent law, readers can choose to believe me or not, as they wish.

You are bringing logic and knowledge into an internet discussion. At what point did you expect that to succeed?

My take, from a business viewpoint and not a legal one, is both sides decided an agreement was far mor important than drawn out legal battle whose outcome is uncertain and thus settling was the best course.
 
Yeah, there is also such thing as the law. The company that violates the law usually is the one who pays regardless of who may lose more.

that is an interesting but not always true result. Juries can be very unpredictable when it comes to deciding who is right and how much they get.
 
What a shocker... yet ANOTHER court case against a big company and supplier to Apple, Apple settled out of court with right before they got ripped apart in the court room..

Said it before, will say it again, this is nothing more then Apples business MO and it’s way to bring supplier costs down to the bare bone, but it seems to consistently lose? However I bet a million bucks they now have reduced costs to pay Qualcomm.

Perhaps they’ll use their modems again now?

It’s today’s world. Apple is not alone by any means. Entities such as Apple, Google, Amazon, QC, and thousands of others have the same MO.

The big players attract the most attention. Therefore they appear the most malignant. I don’t see anything changing in our lifetime.

Intel is tanking today. However, I see QC modems in all flagship iPhone for 2019. No 5G until 2020. Intel still supplying for the devices manufactured in India, and if still around this fall the 8/8+. :apple:
 
Clearly, you didn't read the settlement details. Qualcomm market value jumped 14.5 billion... nearly nothing with apple.

That’s right, because everyone thought Qualcomm is doomed, and because of the settlement they survive. The market reaction merely reflects the fact that everyone assumed Qualcomm would be decimated.
 
The fact that Qualcomm stock is up more than Apple shows exactly the opposite of what you say. Markets in this case wouldn’t reward the “winner” but the company that had more to lose, because if Qualcomm stock goes up it means that now their outlook is more positive than it was before the settlement. Clearly not a lot changed for Apple if their stock didn’t move, in the eyes of investors.
Wrong. Stock does not jump 20% because nothing bad will happen. It jumped because their earnings adjustment was upward significant due to the influx of that apple settlement cash.
 
That’s right, because everyone thought Qualcomm is doomed, and because of the settlement they survive. The market reaction merely reflects the fact that everyone assumed Qualcomm would be decimated.

No, apple isn't the only buyer for Qualcomm. They sell far more to Android makers. The fact is they increased their earnings significantly upward due to settlement cash. Go ahead and live in the reality distortion field. Reality it isn't. Apple blinked.
[doublepost=1555449022][/doublepost]
14.3 $ Billion is the change you find in Tim Cook's pocket

so you are saying 14.5 billion in earnings adjustment upward wouldn't impact apple stock price. That is laughable and someone needs to study markets. (I'm not saying QC got 14.5 billion just your assertion is ridiculous)
 
I hope Apple won’t have buy anything from Qualcomm ever again.

as part of the agreement, Apple will buy from Qualcomm? why? Apple knows Qualcomm makes the best Modems and needs them for the next iPhone. Qualcomm also knows its stock value and market base will increase tremendously if Apple agrees to buy their chips
 
  • Like
Reactions: jase1125
Are you serious?

That does not prove the claim that Qualcomm caved, as you claimed, below.

That’s nonsense. They didn’t fight it because Qualcomm caved, and the new license is no longer unfair. Any lawyer will tell you that Qualcomm charging a patent license fee when you already buy their chips violates Supreme Court precedent.

This is you making assumptions. Plain and simple.



I’ve done so NUMEROUS times on these forums. Here we go again: (i have plenty more if you wish)

“For over 160 years, the doctrine of patent exhaustion has imposed a limit on that right to exclude. See Bloomer v. McQuewan, 14 How. 539, 14 L.Ed. 532 (1853).


<snip>
 
That’s right, because everyone thought Qualcomm is doomed, and because of the settlement they survive. The market reaction merely reflects the fact that everyone assumed Qualcomm would be decimated.

Qualcomm didn’t even get through their conspiracy argument before they folded. Really weak argument, kind of looks like Qualcomm wasn’t really prepared.

“Qualcomm had just begun opening arguments when word arrived that a settlement had been reached. The company was alleging that the trial and associated international legal actions were "planned in advance, every bit of it," and was part of a long, premeditated, campaign to weaken Qualcomm, with the goal of hurting it financially.”
 
Fixed that for you.

The rise is due to Qualcomm's adjustment to their earnings forecast with all that apple settlement money. Apple isn't selling iPhone XS and XR with Qualcomm chips. Therefore, their earnings adjustment is solely based on the settlement check they received from timmy.

Qualcomm said it expected a $2 increase in earnings per share
 
"Apple says the settlement includes a payment from Apple to Qualcomm and a six-year licensing agreement for Qualcomm's technologies."

Looks like Apple realized they weren't going to win the case. A definite positive outcome for Qualcomm.

Apple always had to pay; after all, Qualcomm has patents. The question wasn't whether Apple had to pay, but how much. Whether it was a payment under FRAND terms, or under extortionate terms. Looks like Qualcomm realised that Apple wanted to make fair payments, but not more, and Qualcomm had no chance in court to get what they wanted on top of fair payments.

And of course there had to be a long term licensing agreement, unless either Apple wants to remove Qualcomm from their products, or both companies want to come back to court soon.
[doublepost=1555449985][/doublepost]
Your logic is completely flawed. Everyone agrees that Qualcomm had more to lose. You are implying that the side that has more to lose can't win. It does not make sense.
The biggest risk for Qualcomm was that if Apple won this case, that would set precedent for Samsung. There would have been the huge danger for Qualcomm that Samsung starts selling its own chips (currently only used in Samsung devices) to everyone, destroying Qualcomm's business.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.