What I don't seem to understand is... Apple doesn't manufacture any products containing these techs. They buy the products that contain the tech and, aside from assembling them, resell them to the public. Didn't they pay for the use of the tech when they bought the item? So (and I am sure these relationships are completely incorrect, but go with me) if Qualcomm has Nokia or Motorola tech through legal means to manufacture what are obviously OEM products, haven't they already been compensated for the tech in that chip by Qualcomm? How many times does the tech need to be paid for on that one chip? Is Apple claiming the tech as their own?
I probably don't understand the law behind all of this as well as I need to, but common sense dictates that once a "royalty" or "license" has been paid for on a particular unit, then it is paid for. So if Nokia and Motorola one this tech, and they license it to Qualcomm, and they manufacture a product and sell it to Apple, how has Apple done something wrong? If it is a matter of competitive advantage vs. competition, then shouldn't Nokia and Motorola take that up in their licensing agreement with Qualcomm? It seems they underestimated a competitor who is using tech in an OEM part manufactured by someone who paid for the right to use the tech... and now is trying to damage that competitor because they cannot compete...
Like I said, all I have to go on is common sense. I understand the need to protect and receive compensation for developed tech... But it feels like this is more about not being happy about who is using the tech... Not because it was not paid for, but because it ended up in a competitor product. That feels like an issue and negotiation between the tech owner and the company that licensed the tech to manufacture and sell.
First, some of the patent claims apply only to assembled devices, not to the individual components, so no one paid a license.
Second, whether a license, once paid, applies to value-adding downstream manufacturers is actually a complicated legal issue, known as "patent exhaustion." The case law is evolving on this. Recent cases include Quanta and Transcore. (Google them if you want to see the state of the law).