Apple vs. Qualcomm Trial Begins Today

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
48,653
10,077



Two years after Apple sued Qualcomm over $1 billion in unpaid royalty rebates and anticompetitive patent licensing practices, the tech heavyweights are set to face off in a San Diego courtroom. The trial begins today with jury selection.


Apple manufacturers Foxconn, Pegatron, Wistron, and Compal, whose complaints have been merged with Apple's, allege that they have collectively overpaid Qualcomm approximately $9 billion in royalties, a figure that could be tripled under antitrust laws to $27 billion, according to The New York Times.

Apple argues that Qualcomm should also repay $3.1 billion associated with patents whose rights are exhausted, the report adds.

Apple in January 2017:
For many years Qualcomm has unfairly insisted on charging royalties for technologies they have nothing to do with. The more Apple innovates with unique features such as Touch ID, advanced displays, and cameras, to name just a few, the more money Qualcomm collects for no reason and the more expensive it becomes for Apple to fund these innovations.
Qualcomm in turn estimates that Foxconn, Pegatron, Wistron, and Compal owe more than $7.5 billion in unpaid royalties. Qualcomm also argues that Apple should be held liable for a doubled penalty of at least $15 billion.

Qualcomm in April 2017:
Apple is the world's most profitable seller of cellular devices. But as a late-comer to the cellular industry, Apple contributed virtually nothing to the development of core cellular technology. Instead, Apple's products rely heavily on the cellular inventions of Qualcomm and others. Apple's iPhones and other products enjoy enormous commercial success, but without lightning-fast cellular connectivity--enabled in large part by Qualcomm's inventions--Apple's iPhones would lose much of their consumer appeal.
Apple already won a preliminary judgment ordering Qualcomm to pay nearly $1 billion in withheld rebates last month. Qualcomm has also faced scrutiny from antitrust regulators in multiple countries, including the United States, where an FTC lawyer said evidence of misconduct is "overwhelming."

"The evidence is overwhelming that Qualcomm engaged in exclusionary conduct, and the effects of Qualcomm's conduct, when considered together, are anticompetitive," said FTC lawyer Jennifer Milici, during closing arguments in the FTC vs. Qualcomm trial in January, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Amidst the legal battle, Apple dropped Qualcomm as a supplier of cellular modems starting with last year's iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR, with rival chipmaker Intel fulfilling all orders for those devices.

Article Link: Apple vs. Qualcomm Trial Begins Today
 

No. 44

macrumors member
Oct 29, 2016
96
275
Long gone
"The more Apple innovates with unique features such as Touch ID, advanced displays, and cameras, to name just a few, the more money Qualcomm collects for no reason and the more expensive it becomes for Apple to fund these innovations."

The camera is a "unique feature"?

o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech

NinjaHERO

macrumors 6502a
Aug 29, 2008
922
1,083
U S of A
At least now we'll finally get to the bottom of this matter. I don't know who is to blame for the dispute, but I for one am excited the truth will finally come out. lol. /s
 

Marekul

macrumors 6502
Jan 2, 2018
369
621
"The more Apple innovates with unique features such as Touch ID, advanced displays, and cameras, to name just a few, the more money Qualcomm collects for no reason and the more expensive it becomes for Apple to fund these innovations."

The camera is a "unique feature"?

o_O
They should have thought about that before signing a contract that calculates licensing cost based on device cost...
 

MX20

Suspended
Sep 28, 2018
59
55
This is a waste of time for everyone at  and it’s not going to bode well for both company. Qualcomm started to charge a few percentages higher due to iPhone X Notch Screen chopped off a portion display and is by far the most unprofessional looking device ever produced from Apple.
[doublepost=1555338453][/doublepost]Qualcomm should consider charging at a higher rate if Apple unable to make the new 2019 iPhone without a notch.
 

AnthonyG6

macrumors regular
Sep 13, 2017
184
173
This is a waste of time for everyone at  and it’s not going to bode well for both company. Qualcomm started to charge a few percentages higher due to iPhone X Notch Screen chopped off a portion display and is by far the most unprofessional looking device ever produced from Apple.
[doublepost=1555338453][/doublepost]Qualcomm should consider charging at a higher rate if Apple unable to make the new 2019 iPhone without a notch.
This is such a ridiculous comment; what has the notch got to do with any of this?
 

realtuner

Suspended
Mar 8, 2019
1,712
5,051
Canada
Talk about interesting timing.

The CEO of Huawei said in an interview with CNBC yesterday that they’d be open to selling 5G modems to Apple, and also called Apple a “great company”.

So much for the rumor last week being fake.
 

I7guy

macrumors Core
Nov 30, 2013
22,540
10,386
Gotta be in it to win it
Talk about interesting timing.

The CEO of Huawei said in an interview with CNBC yesterday that they’d be open to selling 5G modems to Apple, and also called Apple a “great company”.

So much for the rumor last week being fake.
Wouldn’t that be something if that actually happened? They called Apple a “great company”. Wow!
 

realtuner

Suspended
Mar 8, 2019
1,712
5,051
Canada
Wouldn’t that be something if that actually happened? They called Apple a “great company”. Wow!
I see no need for the CEO of Huawei to heap praise on Apple (multiple times) during his interview other than to drive home the point they’d be open to doing business regarding 5G modems.

Unlike the CEO of Qualcomm who states he thinks Apple will be a future customer for modems while simultaneously double dipping on licensing fees and filing nuisance suits against Apple.
 

Carnegie

macrumors 6502a
May 24, 2012
629
1,432
They should have thought about that before signing a contract that calculates licensing cost based on device cost...
Apple should have? Apple surely did, that’s likely part of why Apple was never able to reach a direct licensing agreement with Qualcomm. Apple and Qualcomm had some other, now expired, agreements. But they never had a direct licensing agreement.
 

mrex

macrumors 68040
Jul 16, 2014
3,321
1,394
europe
Those two patents sound like BS. 1) Quickly transferring data from device to Internet. AND 2) quickly connecting to the Internet after boot. Really, Qualcomm didn't invert the Internet nor did they invert data.
no, qualcomm didnt invent the internet - but that wasnt the patent apple infringed. and those patents are far from being bs.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.