Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Sues Motorola Over Licensing of Cellular Technology by Qualcomm

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,946
39,942



Reuters reports that Apple has filed a lawsuit against Motorola Mobility alleging that Motorola has breached a licensing agreement with Qualcomm in its efforts to have a number of Apple's iOS devices banned from sale in Germany. Following a December victory by Motorola in a German court, Apple last week briefly pulled all 3G-enabled products with the exception of the iPhone 4S from its German online store. They were restored within a few hours after the injunction was suspended.

apple_motorola_qualcomm_logos.jpg



Today's lawsuit specifically addresses the iPhone 4S, which Motorola has also been seeking to block in Germany and other countries. The iPhone 4S utilizes Qualcomm's MDM6610 baseband chip, and Apple argues that Qualcomm's patent license with Motorola exhausts Motorola's rights to further royalties from Apple.
The suit, filed in a San Diego federal court, argues that Motorola's German lawsuit against Apple breaches terms of a patent licensing agreement between Motorola and Qualcomm. [...]

In the latest lawsuit, Apple says that as a Qualcomm customer, Apple is a third-party beneficiary of Motorola's agreement with Qualcomm. Under that agreement, Motorola's rights under certain patents are exhausted, Apple argues.
Click to expand...
Apple has raised this issue before, perhaps most notably in defending itself against Samsung in Australia where it similarly claimed that Apple is protected from attacks based on these patents related to core cellular technologies by virtue of Qualcomm's licensing agreements. Motorola and Samsung have disagreed with Apple on that front, and Apple is now pressing the matter with a lawsuit of its own specifically addressing the issue as it relates to Motorola's efforts in Germany.



Article Link: Apple Sues Motorola Over Licensing of Cellular Technology by Qualcomm
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/02/10/apple-sues-motorola-over-licensing-of-cellular-technology-by-qualcomm/
Wow here we go again...

Man this is just nuts already the lawyers the only true ones here making money...
 
basesloaded190 said:
And the suing cycle continues...
Click to expand...

Which in the case of these patents and licensing relationships is IMHO a good thing.

Apple has the cash to burn on this to get the courts to clarify expectations for FRAND and license carryover. Regardless of how this plays out it should help set precedence for everyone in the industry allow for more normal business planning and licensing.

In other words this is good thing for everyone, just be happy Apple has the cash and desire to fight this side of things.
 
Motorola is trying to double dip

It's simply really. Motorola has licensed its FRAND patents to Qualcomm. Qualcomm pays the licensing fee and is free to use that tech in its chips. Apple purchases and uses said Qualcomm chips in its products. Motorola is now trying to collect a fee from Apple for the use of its technology covered by the FRAND patents even though they have already collected the fee from Qualcomm. Motorola is trying to double dip and argue that Apple should not be included in its licensing agreement with Qualcomm. Essentially, Motorola is trying to collect a non-FRAND patent fee from Apple for a FRAND patent, even though they already collected that fee from Qualcomm.
 
shawnce said:
Which in the case of these patents and licensing relationships is IMHO a good thing.

Apple has the cash to burn on this to get the courts to clarify expectations for FRAND and license carryover. Regardless of how this plays out it should help set precedence for everyone in the industry allow for more normal business planning and licensing.
Click to expand...

I really hope this is a good thing.
 
richlizard24 said:
It's simply really. Motorola has licensed its FRAND patents to Qualcomm. Qualcomm pays the licensing fee and is free to use that tech in its chips. Apple purchases and uses said Qualcomm chips in its products. Motorola is now trying to collect a fee from Apple for the use of its technology covered by the FRAND patents even though they have already collected the fee from Qualcomm. Motorola is trying to double dip and argue that Apple should not be included in its licensing agreement with Qualcomm. Essentially, Motorola is trying to collect a non-FRAND patent fee from Apple for a FRAND patent, even though they already collected that fee from Qualcomm.
Click to expand...

I have to agree, if this is the correct understanding (seems to to me).

Its like going to the hardware store to buy some screws, I buy them, take them home, and now the screw manufacture calls me up and says I have to pay again to use them in my project.
 
Well if it really is that clear cut and motorola are trying cash in twice then something needs to be done about it.



So if Qualcomm pays for the licence who are they meant to sell the chips to if no one else has the licence?
 
richlizard24 said:
It's simply really. Motorola has licensed its FRAND patents to Qualcomm. Qualcomm pays the licensing fee and is free to use that tech in its chips. Apple purchases and uses said Qualcomm chips in its products. Motorola is now trying to collect a fee from Apple for the use of its technology covered by the FRAND patents even though they have already collected the fee from Qualcomm. Motorola is trying to double dip and argue that Apple should not be included in its licensing agreement with Qualcomm. Essentially, Motorola is trying to collect a non-FRAND patent fee from Apple for a FRAND patent, even though they already collected that fee from Qualcomm.
Click to expand...

I do not know the details on this one but the mere fact that Qualcomm licensed something from Motorola does not necessarily mean that the user of their chips does not have to license this thing. For example, the patent may cover some mechanism which implementation requires certain chip functionality (hence Qualcomm license) and complementing functionality in the phone circuitry (or antenna or whatever). In this case, phone manufacturer would have to get a license too.
 
jon1987 said:
Well if it really is that clear cut and motorola are trying cash in twice then something needs to be done about it.



So if Qualcomm pays for the licence who are they meant to sell the chips to if no one else has the licence?
Click to expand...

The way it is supposed to work is that the license is transferred when a company purchases the chips from Qualcomm. This appears to be fine with Motorola, but not when it is Apple purchasing the chips from Qualcomm. Motorola is abusing its FRAND patents to try and get a massive cut of Apple's mobile business.
 
One a side note I do hope Apple gets clarification of what "fare" is under FRAND patents.

I agree with Apple that being asked to pay a percentage of the full sale price of the device you ship to customers is wrong. For example (yeah contrived example) say I make a car that contains cellular like capabilities that require me to license a FRAND patent. The cost for me to include this cellular capability is a VERY small fraction of the total cost of the car yet under some FRAND requests I would be expected to pay a percentage based on the total cost of the car. This fee with would be disproportionate to the cost and utility of the cellular feature compared the whole of the vehicle.

I agree with Apple that the percentage should be relative to how much the patented component costs in the device at a minimum and possibly factor in the utility feature to whole package.
 
lilo777 said:
I do not know the details on this one but the mere fact that Qualcomm licensed something from Motorola does not necessarily mean that the user of their chips does not have to license this thing. For example, the patent may cover some mechanism which implementation requires certain chip functionality (hence Qualcomm license) and complementing functionality in the phone circuitry (or antenna or whatever). In this case, phone manufacturer would have to get a license too.
Click to expand...

It's possible that this could be true, but I doubt anyone will get the real story from either side. To me it seems that Motorola will try and make a case in lines to what you are saying. Qualcomm has purchased a license and that said license is transferred to Apple when it purchases the chips, but Apple's integration and implementation of the chip violates another patent that Motorola holds. This is all speculation on my part. It just reeks of Motorola trying to get a cut of iPhone/iPad sales, a la Microsoft with Android.
 
richlizard24 said:
The way it is supposed to work is that the license is transferred when a company purchases the chips from Qualcomm. This appears to be fine with Motorola, but not when it is Apple purchasing the chips from Qualcomm. Motorola is abusing its FRAND patents to try and get a massive cut of Apple's mobile business.
Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining :)
It just seems like blatant abuse of FRAND to me.

Surely that would be like me paying Netflix to watch a film, and then the film studio asking me to pay for the licence aswell.
 
Seems like the legal team at Apple were fed up with the spotlight always being on the product division. I for one wish Apple would stop making things, and just concentrate on the core business of suing people.
 
lilo777 said:
I do not know the details on this one but the mere fact that Qualcomm licensed something from Motorola does not necessarily mean that the user of their chips does not have to license this thing. For example, the patent may cover some mechanism which implementation requires certain chip functionality (hence Qualcomm license) and complementing functionality in the phone circuitry (or antenna or whatever). In this case, phone manufacturer would have to get a license too.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Do you have people coming to your home demanding you pay them a stipend for all the parts of your television, car, mixer, or refrigerator? When you buy a product, you buy the things that were used in making it as well. Apple bought these chips, so Moto already got paid.
 
Good. This is what happens when you mess with the bull. Horns.

Apple has the time, resources and money to see this through and to simply roll with it as necessary. Moto, not so much:

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/20...ary-sales-trail-estimates-on-litigation-costs

Motorola Mobility’s Preliminary Sales Trail Estimates on Litigation Costs

Motorola Mobility Inc. (MMI), the phone maker that agreed to be bought by Google (GOOG) Inc., reported preliminary fourth-quarter sales that trailed analysts’ estimates, citing mounting competition and higher legal costs.
Sales were probably little changed at $3.4 billion in the period, Libertyville, Illinois-based Motorola Mobility said in a statement today. Bloomberg analysts had forecast revenue of $4 billion. Motorola, which recently won a German patent ruling against Apple Inc. (AAPL), cited higher costs from intellectual property litigation and an “increased competitive environment” in the mobile-device market in the quarter.

The handset maker said it shipped about 10.5 million devices during the period, of which more than half were smartphones.

The company said it expects to complete its transaction with Mountain View, California-based Google early this year. Motorola fell 0.4 percent to $38.30 in extended trading, after closing at $38.46. The shares rose (MMI) 33 percent last year. The company plans to report earnings on Jan. 26.
Click to expand...

But let's forgive Moto for now. Google is trying very hard to recoup that $12 billion, after all. They might find, however, that they've bitten off a little more than they (or Moto) can chew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back