Oh they did this all right, they stopped Broadcomm from competing in their CDMA space.
Qualcomm is the poster child for anti-trust.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Qualcomm Accuses Apple of Stealing LTE Modem Trade Secrets and Giving Them to Intel [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh they did this all right, they stopped Broadcomm from competing in their CDMA space.
Qualcomm is the poster child for anti-trust.
Well, what sort of an idiot picks a fight with their biggest customer...
It's like a car dealer trying to insult or sue me into buying a car. It's never going to end well - for them.
Okay, I didn't read it all but if the only Proof Qualcomm has is an online post from a FIRED intel engineer who says "we were told to ignore trade secrets" they are gonna have a hard time winning this case, unless Qualcomm can promise this guy a job I wonder how likely he would be to blow us his career and testify.
This is not about who’s basebands are better. It’s about Qualcomm acting like a jealous ex girlfriend. Kind of sad.
Not sure everyone posting here & taking sides fully understands discovery. Qual's lawyer said evidence was found during the discovery process. Undoubtedly no company knows everything it has done. Records retention rules allow for this, and companies try their best to ensure things that can influence juries do not get documented. It sounds as though something was found. Might be Qual posturing, might be real. A big reason to avoid lawsuits is to avoid discovery.
This just screams, desperate company suing a high value customer into staying with them. It’s a risky move, as if they lose, they’ll probably alienate their other customers. But the fact they’re willing to do this to try and keep Apple suggests that it’s either true, or Apple leaving will be catastrophic for Qualcomm.
It is so cute to see people’s twisted silly arguments. When it comes to Apple products.....oh yeah, it is just a bit of rounded corners (besides almost cloning the whole thing to the point when people could not distinguish one from the other) But when it comes to the “dumped jealous ex gf”..... of course they have something of actual value.
WOW. This is really, really interesting.
There seem to be a lot of people in here who are brainwashed by Apple into being anti-Qualcomm. I'm not usually a big proponent of more rights for intellectual property holders, as usually the concept of intellectual property is abused and contorted until it's utterly meaningless with idiotic laws like the DMCA. However, in this case, Qualcomm did the work, made the better radios, and Apple just stole Qualcomm's IP, went to Intel and tried to help Intel patch up their awful radios that have been awful for 7+ years, while Qualcomm has spent billions on R&D.
In other news, I wouldn't buy any flagship phone that doesn't have gigabit LTE powered by Qualcomm's X20 radio. Qualcomm's RF technology is just so far ahead of anybody else's at this point.
There seem to be a lot of people in here who are brainwashed by Apple into being anti-Qualcomm. I'm not usually a big proponent of more rights for intellectual property holders, as usually the concept of intellectual property is abused and contorted until it's utterly meaningless with idiotic laws like the DMCA. However, in this case, Qualcomm did the work, made the better radios, and Apple just stole Qualcomm's IP, went to Intel and tried to help Intel patch up their awful radios that have been awful for 7+ years, while Qualcomm has spent billions on R&D.
In other news, I wouldn't buy any flagship phone that doesn't have gigabit LTE powered by Qualcomm's X20 radio. Qualcomm's RF technology is just so far ahead of anybody else's at this point.
Good to know your willing to ignore/disregard 41.4% of users... oh well, must be holding it wrong?
Patents were originally supposed to protect the inventor/developer for a long enough time for them to make money off the invention but then released to other manufacturers so the idea could continue to be improved. You didn’t have the right to charge others forever based on something you patented.
Where this has gone horribly wrong is the the amount of time starts not when you initially file for the patent but when the patent was approved. Technically someone can reverse engineer and use a companies technology but if a patent has been filed for, but not yet granted-this is what the phrase ‘patent pending’ means- then as soon as the patent is granted your company is in violation of that patent and owes money for violating it.
Items stay in the patent pending phase for as long as possible. This prolongs how long a company can claim exclusive rights to manufacture beyond the time the patent itself covers.
I’m sure there are lawyers who will say it’s a bad idea but patent pending should also have a fixed time, and it shouldn’t be allowed to be longer than the patent protection provides.
Where this has gone horribly wrong is the the amount of time starts not when you initially file for the patent but when the patent was approved. Technically someone can reverse engineer and use a companies technology but if a patent has been filed for, but not yet granted-this is what the phrase ‘patent pending’ means- then as soon as the patent is granted your company is in violation of that patent and owes money for violating it.
Items stay in the patent pending phase for as long as possible. This prolongs how long a company can claim exclusive rights to manufacture beyond the time the patent itself covers.
I’m sure there are lawyers who will say it’s a bad idea but patent pending should also have a fixed time, and it shouldn’t be allowed to be longer than the patent protection provides.
You forgot the other bit, which is that regardless of the facts, a bunch of folk are gonna get their panties in a twist and accuse the nasty Apple of malfeasance against the honorable and abused Qualcomm.I think I see how this works, regardless of the facts, a bunch of folk are gonna get their panties in a twist and accuse the nasty people of trying to rob their precious Apple.. even if Apple were in fact to blame. That's irrelevant , they will defend them as if it were their own child... I'll just have a quick look at the comments to see how my theory pans out...
In general let’s just choose one:
A. I have no idea about the actual details of the case, but I favor Apple.
B. I have no idea about the actual details of the case, but I favor Qualcomm.
C. A, plus I could rant about it.
D. B, plus I could rant about it.
The geniuses who run Qualcomm should have thought of this before picking a battle with their biggest customer.
What's happened with these guys over the years is that they're seeing handset manufacturers rake in record profits and they are bitter that they just supply a chipset.
Probably intentional but for further improvements let's see the battle. I feel Qualcomm makes good case but they are no saints either I know they were greedy as Apple!
In the battle of evils you can't take sides!
No not ignoring just stating where my phone falls in this issue, 40 percent is significant and I did not hide that statistic.
UPDATE: gonna have to eat my words LOL I am starting to have problems with my
WIFI failing both 2.4 and 5 ghz when i am out side still works in house and bars look same but fluctuate a lot so outside WIFI is worse.
Since I also have only 1 sometimes two cell bars those seem to be worse today but not earlier this weekend so I guess I am joining the 40% with issues interesting changes hmm. In strong cell areas 3-4 i am still getting better results
Sent from my iPad
Last edited:
Chipset is pointless in America because no cellular networks supports these speeds.
This sounds like BS that Big Pharma uses in America to monopolize the market. Even when most of the drugs they sell were actually developed outside the US.
Read the complaints. IF Qualcomm can prove them, Apple and Intel are in deep poop.
Anyone saying Qualcomm is crying sour grapes has clearly not read the court filing.
This has nothing to do with patents themselves. This has to do with Qualcomm's proprietary tool set for tuning modems. (Trade secrets).
Qualcomm and Apple have an agreement on the usage of those tools. Who can use them and where the code can exist within Apple.
If those tools and/or output were shared with Intel, as Qualcomm alleges, Apple is in breach of the agreement.
Anyone saying Qualcomm is crying sour grapes has clearly not read the court filing.
This has nothing to do with patents themselves. This has to do with Qualcomm's proprietary tool set for tuning modems. (Trade secrets).
Qualcomm and Apple have an agreement on the usage of those tools. Who can use them and where the code can exist within Apple.
If those tools and/or output were shared with Intel, as Qualcomm alleges, Apple is in breach of the agreement.
I agree, it's quite silly to debate the utility of a rounded edge vs a refined, multi-generational wide-band radio chipset and software stack that drives it.
How do you know? If you do know then you could be a key defense witness for Apple. The judge will call you to the stand and you can say, my name is … and I know that Apple didn't steal the technology because my name is … and I know everything. Qualcomm will definitely be presenting what it thinks is strong evidence to the court. They wouldn't file a lawsuit costing them millions of dollars, over many years, just for fun. When developing the technology needed, Qualcomm probably learned what had to be done to get the performance they achieved and probably know there are only so many ways that it can be done. So, if another company is generating similar performance, they must be using certain techniques, and that might be how Qualcomm can provide prima facie evidence for their case.
Your argument also is weak. "otherwise these Intel phones would be as powerful as Qualcomm". Intel would never copy the exact code as that would be stupid. Thus, there are bound to be differences in performance the two chip makers. Even if the two chips companies had the same code, performance would vary due to fabrication techniques. Do you think companies like Apple and Qualcomm have a right to their IP? What would you do if you were the CEO of Qualcomm? Would you roll over and die if you thought someone broke a contract with you or would you fight back?