Or Apple will hire them. These new employees will incorporate this technology in new Apple chips. Qualcomm will sue Apple for patent infringement and the circle of patent litigation will live on.
Or, Apple will acquire Broadcom.
Or Apple will hire them. These new employees will incorporate this technology in new Apple chips. Qualcomm will sue Apple for patent infringement and the circle of patent litigation will live on.
MacRumors, could you please create a new section SUE BLOG so we don't need to cover this never ending story on the front page any more?![]()
So not only do you not understand patent trolling, you've somehow decided the proper outcome, no doubt after countless hours of meticulously studying the details of the case.
Or how they patented an oblong shape with round corners in the colours of black and white... and submitted drawings that looked like 10 year olds did them of said shape as evidence in court against Samsung.
Please don’t try to claim Apple isn’t a patent troll and is innocent..
Apple has a small team of in-house patent litigators who manage outside counsel, which is generally what all big companies do. Small companies simply have the ceo or gc manage them. Some companies have patent attorneys who create patents.
Patent litigators will sometimes take cases on contingency, but mostly for non practicing entities. I’ve never heard of patent litigators being on retainer, though. It wouldn’t make economic sense.
Small team? Pretty sure Apple’s legal team consists of nearly 500 layers, etc. Not exactly a small number.
Also I believe a lot of work for companies on a permanent basis since the companies want them to be familiar with their products so that they have a better chance of winning.
crazy how people don’t get this, it’s not a phone without Qualcomm’s tech
Apple has a design patent for a mobile phone, which among other elements has a rectangular shape with rounded corners. Plus many other design elements.
To infringe on a design patent, you have to copy _all_ elements. That's what Samsung did.
Here you go again with your usual BS.
Apple profits hugely from iOS and their software services, from their vastly superior processors that are light years ahead of Samsung and Qualcomm, from their outstanding service/support, from the premium construction of their devices and many other small details.
Qualcomm is a minor contributor to the success of the iPhone, though they like to pretend they are a major reason. This allows them to justify what they feel they’re owed.
Clearly *any* product with Qualcomm cellular modems in it will be *wildly* profitable / successful then ...
[doublepost=1511974559][/doublepost]https://seekingalpha.com/article/86862-the-ripple-effect-of-the-qualcomm-nokia-settlement
The move to Qualcomm’s chipsets certainly worked out well for Nokia... Lol.
Pretty sure the Intel modem in my iPhone X works just fine ...![]()
I'd love to know how well an iPhone would fare if it couldn't connect to any of the cellular wireless networks.
Almost all of what you listed here, might be true. But would be absolutely meaningless without this capability. the iPhone is Apple's biggest revenue producer and the current image of their company. Without it being a "phone", it would just be an iPod, which is a dead product category (That Apple themselves helped kill by having a Phone that could connect to wireless networks)
[doublepost=1512326072][/doublepost]
Having cellular connectivity doesn't guarantee success. NOT having cellular connectivity would likely have killed the iPhone's success.
you had a logic failure in your post.
[doublepost=1512326605][/doublepost]
Intel pays a different license deal to Qualcomm for the ability to create those modems.
the lawsuit's here between Apple and Qualcomm isn't about the physical hardware, but the technologies those hardware use to connect. it's been long standing practice in the mobile field that the end device seller pays a separate license to actually use the technology.
Vernon v. Monsanto,