Yep, unless Foxconn's license has an exemption for memory (which it might), they (and thus Apple) would pay Qualcomm an extra ~ $1.53 in royalties for a $47 memory increase that Apple charges its customers $200 extra for. Coincidentally, that's an extra $153 in profit, or 100 times the amount of the extra license fee.
Poor, poor Apple. How did they ever get to a quarter trillion dollars in pure stashed profit with such a horrible burden? Oh, that's right. By selling a phone with 3G/4G courtesy of companies like Qualcomm.
It's hard to be sympathetic to either company, frankly. They're both quite wealthy. Of course, if Apple disappeared tomorrow, we'd still have plenty of smartphones to choose from, and we'd still have 5G coming, courtesy of companies like Qualcomm.
My question is, how can they accuse them of double dipping at all?
Qualcomm's license is not with the modem chipmaker. It's with the phone OEM. So Apple (I mean, Foxconn) is NOT paying twice for that IP.
This is just Apple lawyers handwaving like crazy, hoping to twist the royalty base away from the device to relatively cheap chips.
But as one court has noted, basing an IP royalty off the cost of a chip that uses it, is like saying a book is only worth as much as its paper and binding.