FTC Abandons Antitrust Lawsuit Against Qualcomm

[Rigby]

I would like to know what (or who) exactly these unspecified "headwinds" are. Since when do government agencies get cowed so easily if they believe to be in the right?

 

[rp100]

My opinion, but Qualcomm should’ve gotten tagged with a Sherman act violation. The FTC would’ve won at least a portion of their argument before the Supreme Court. I can only imagine the amount of political lobbying involved and death threats heaped upon the FTC.

The problem isn’t that Qualcomm is smart or successful or even the best at what they do. I wholeheartedly agree that they are super-smart and entitled to the profit of their labor. However, they are using their patents and market position to squeeze every last dollar out of their licensees. They also charge based on the final sale price of the device, so the same modem or license for a $1300 phone costs more money than a $700 phone. The customer is being taxed additional money by Qualcomm, with no additional features, simply because the end-user can afford it. This is not a Qualcomm/Apple spat - Qualcomm is doing this to everyone.

Someone joked about chargers disappearing because the modem costs went up, but that’s exactly what happened. Apple will only absorb so much cost before it gets passed to the consumer. The result: Apple’s elimination of the charging blocks was spun as some kind of tree-hugging gesture and Qualcomm recorded record profits after the launch of 5G iPhones.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

The cynic is me says that Apple was pushing this with the FTC. And when Apple bought Intel, they no longer had a reason to neuter with Qualcomm, and in fact every reason to keep the Qualcomm monopoly as it would harm Apple's competitors.

 

[Wondercow]

. . . Apple dropped the case and reached a settlement with Qualcomm in 2019 after it became clear there were no other options for 5G modems for use in 2020 iPhones.

Is there a citation for this or is it presumption/opinion?

 

[amartinez1660]

The cynic is me says that Apple was pushing this with the FTC. And when Apple bought Intel, they no longer had a reason to neuter with Qualcomm, and in fact every reason to keep the Qualcomm monopoly as it would harm Apple's competitors.

Know what? I would watch these type of things in movie form and all.

The cynic in me woke up to this comment but I realize that it’s often not on purpose either, it’s just the people involved taking the paths of least resistance, going for low hanging fruits first, changing aims mid-ways, etc...

 

[Td1970]

That’s discouraging. For a patent troll, at least Qualcomm does make

My opinion, but Qualcomm should’ve gotten tagged with a Sherman act violation. The FTC would’ve won at least a portion of their argument before the Supreme Court. I can only imagine the amount of political lobbying involved and death threats heaped upon the FTC.

The problem isn’t that Qualcomm is smart or successful or even the best at what they do. I wholeheartedly agree that they are super-smart and entitled to the profit of their labor. However, they are using their patents and market position to squeeze every last dollar out of their licensees. They also charge based on the final sale price of the device, so the same modem or license for a $1300 phone costs more money than a $700 phone. The customer is being taxed additional money by Qualcomm, with no additional features, simply because the end-user can afford it. This is not a Qualcomm/Apple spat - Qualcomm is doing this to everyone.

Someone joked about chargers disappearing because the modem costs went up, but that’s exactly what happened. Apple will only absorb so much cost before it gets passed to the consumer. The result: Apple’s elimination of the charging blocks was spun as some kind of tree-hugging gesture and Qualcomm recorded record profits after the launch of 5G iPhones.

how is QC a patent troll. They actually make modems. Using their own technology. Use it you pay for it. Same as Apple.

So basically your ok with Apple squeezing every cent that they can from customers but its wrong for QC do the same thing.

I think we can agree that QC makes the best modems. if you want to use them you pay QC. Same as paying Apple a premium price for use of their devices.

 

[tooltalk]

This is disappointing... Is the FTC in need of some teeth?

This shenangan trial had no teeth beyond Koh's court in Apple backyard.

 

[JPack]

The cynic is me says that Apple was pushing this with the FTC. And when Apple bought Intel, they no longer had a reason to neuter with Qualcomm, and in fact every reason to keep the Qualcomm monopoly as it would harm Apple's competitors.

It's not cynical, it's the only correct way to look at this case. But Apple still wants to kill Qualcomm.

Qualcomm enables so many Android competitors, so of course Apple would want to weaken Qualcomm to reduce competition.

Judge Kuo made an error in her ruling due to a misunderstanding of fundamental concepts. Her ruling basically states, if there is a small essential function within the modem, then Qualcomm must license out the whole thing, including non-essential functions at a "reasonable" price. In that case, every processor, whether it's from Intel or Apple would have similar essential functions and follow the same logic. It's no surprise Kuo's ruling got thrown out.

Lawyers from all sides have provided their opinion of this case and most agree there's no substance. It's no surprise the FTC abandoned it.