Qualcomm Accuses Apple of Stealing LTE Modem Trade Secrets and Giving Them to Intel [Updated]

[Heineken]

I really don’t understand your point. There is a link in this thread to an official court filing where Qualcomm states they have an email where Apple sent their trade secrets to INTEL. Unless your point is that smart people are perfect and don’t make mistakes (which is probably what happened here).

They can state anything they want doesn’t mean it really was like that. That email might exist, but its content is unknown at this point.

 

[recoil80]

- Apple being the company to reverse engineer and sell these secrets to Intel doesn't make a lot of sense. Intel is more than capable and adding more people means adding more evidence or potential leaks. If Apple were stealing these secrets it seems to make more sense that they made their own baseband chips, similar to how they make their own A-series chips and GPUs, rather than relying on another 3rd party.

I think they'll get there.
First the CPU, then the GPU. They have their custom W1 chip for bluetooth. Next one is the baseband, one of the most important aspects or their product line as it impacts iPhone, Apple Watch, iPad and possibly a future product like their AR glasses.

 

[FFR]

I really don’t understand your point. There is a link in this thread to an official court filing where Qualcomm states they have an email where Apple sent their trade secrets to INTEL. Unless your point is that smart people are perfect and don’t make mistakes (which is probably what happened here).

Qualcomm also believed that they could charge sep patents based on the total price of the phone instead of the component involved.

If it were true the would sue intel first not apple.
Apple is the customer
Intel is the manufacturer

 

[DNichter]

It is possible that Intel has done a good job (with whatever information they got from whomever) on Xs and that connectivity problems are down to antenna design
Still doesn't mean Intel will do a decent job in the future on 5G ..
For Qualcomm, the nervousness has got be that Apple is buying enough time to develop its own modem tech and using the best possible version of Intel in transit

Fair points. Yea I was more so joking around a bit. I haven't had any connectivity problems so can't speak to that really. I am confident in either solution Apple comes up with.

 

[aka777]

If you actually bothered to ask or learn about the technology involved, you would know that 4x4 MIMO is useful on every cell site, because phones ...

Also, Qualcomm's improvements in radio performance on the X20 go well beyond the specs and numbers of gigabit LTE, and provide faster speeds and better signal strength in a wide variety of conditions.

I'm not with AT&T and wouldn't touch that carrier if they literally paid me to use their service. So the rest of us don't have this problem. Tmobile is certainly not deploying 4x4 MIMO on their low band.

I don't want qualcomm, so I don't care what features they offer. They're a terrible company to deal with and they played a game of chicken with one their biggest customers and clearly lost.

 

[cmaier]

In this case "accidental disclosure" happen to incidentally benefit Apple (a lot). Is not it a little bit suspicious?
[doublepost=1537941292][/doublepost]

As Steve Jobs would have said: " You steal it wrong".

It’s not at all suspicious and it benefits appl only in the most indirect way.

You’ve never accidentally sent a mail not realizing someone was on the cc line? There’s a reason iOS supports a function to highlight non-domain email addresses in the header, though in this case it wouldn’t have helped since it was intended for a non domain email address.

 

[BiggAW]

I'm not with AT&T and wouldn't touch that carrier if they literally paid me to use their service. So the rest of us don't have this problem. Tmobile is certainly not deploying 4x4 MIMO on their low band.

I don't want qualcomm, so I don't care what features they offer. They're a terrible company to deal with and they played a game of chicken with one their biggest customers and clearly lost.

Obviously you don't care to read my posts or actually LEARN anything, because if you did, you would now know that 4x4 MIMO uses antenna diversity to help with weak signals, so it doesn't matter if you ever find a tower with 4x4 MIMO, you will still benefit from it. Antenna diversity will help AT&T and Verizon customers a lot, and T-Mobile customers even more, since T-Mobile isn't as good as AT&T and Verizon in many, many areas.

What market are you in? AT&T is very good in many places, other places it's not. However, the point about 5x CA still stands, as it can be used as 4x CA or 3x CA on carriers and markets that have that configuration, and as part of Gigabit LTE, 4x CA still has MASSIVE benefits completely aside from top speeds.

You can fault Qualcomm for their bizarre and arguably excessive pricing strategy, but at the end of the day, they are the only company that makes the best radios. They are the only company that has put the billions of dollars of R&D in to make their radios work where other radios simply don't. Apple decided that they didn't want to pay the price for the premium radios, and decided to put low-quality, poorly performing Intel radios into their supposedly premium phones, and that is 100% Apple's fault. They could have absolutely afforded to build the Xs/ Xs Max/Xr series on Qualcomm X20 radios, but they chose the inferior Intel parts instead. On top of that, we now know that whether purposefully or inadvertently they stole Qualcomm's IP in their quest to stop using Qualcomm because of their petty feud.

So while you have No Service in more places than ever, I'll have the equivalent of a DSL connection in my pocket in weak signal areas with Qualcomm X20.

You should actually bother to READ and UNDERSTAND what people are posting instead of making dumb blanket statements that prove you don't actually understand the technology or it's benefits.
[doublepost=1537970210][/doublepost]

It’s not at all suspicious and it benefits appl only in the most indirect way.

You’ve never accidentally sent a mail not realizing someone was on the cc line? There’s a reason iOS supports a function to highlight non-domain email addresses in the header, though in this case it wouldn’t have helped since it was intended for a non domain email address.
[doublepost=1537969984][/doublepost]
That’s very different than “bad faith” which has a very specific legal meaning. There’s a difference between “they didn’t try to negotiate” and “they negotiated in bad faith.”

Nor does it say they “didn’t follow” the rules. It says they didn’t AVAIL themselves of the rules. You’re clever, but phrasing it as if they broke ETSI rules when instead they didn’t take advantage of an etsi procedure is shenanigans.

I have no doubt that Apple did not negotiate with Qualcomm in good faith, as they seem to have a grudge against the company, and have worked very hard to put inferior Intel modems into their phones when they have to know that the Qualcomm radios are better.

However, I'm not sold on intent. I'm a huge fan of Hanlon's razor, never attribute to malice what can be adequately attributed to stupidity, so the jury is still out on that one. That being said, if you have a company that's incompetent at protecting another company's IP, that still doesn't look great for them.

 

[FFR]

Brilliant analysis.

The 4G LTE FRAND Patents lawsuit between Apple and Samsung has proven that Apple does not negotiate in good faith. The courts found Apple guilty of blatant IP theft and recommended that the US ban all imports of iPhones.

While Obama reversed this decision (Due to economic reasons and not legal reasons), it still does not change the fact that Apple was guilty of stealing Samsung's technology and that this lawsuit exposed how Apple operates.

Apple steals IPs first and then possibly pays royalties later. It's a very unethical move on Apple's part.

The only thing it proves is that apple doesn’t negotiate with Samsung.

Who could blame them after Samsung stole their ip.


If a thief stole from you would you pay them?

Thought so.

 

[kdarling]

Apple initially sued Qualcomm in June 2017 for $1 billion in unpaid royalties, and later for patent infringement.

Ooops. Editing error?

Apple sued Qualcomm over $1 billion in unpaid REBATES. The unpaid royalties were to Qualcomm.

(Apple strong-armed their phone makers to stop paying their license royalties, by withholding their own payments to the phone makers. Apple itself never got a license from Qualcomm. Instead, they rode on the back of licenses long owned by factories like Foxconn)

 

[Heineken]

Obviously you don't care to read my posts or actually LEARN anything, because if you did, you would now know that 4x4 MIMO uses antenna diversity to help with weak signals, so it doesn't matter if you ever find a tower with 4x4 MIMO, you will still benefit from it. Antenna diversity will help AT&T and Verizon customers a lot, and T-Mobile customers even more, since T-Mobile isn't as good as AT&T and Verizon in many, many areas.

What market are you in? AT&T is very good in many places, other places it's not. However, the point about 5x CA still stands, as it can be used as 4x CA or 3x CA on carriers and markets that have that configuration, and as part of Gigabit LTE, 4x CA still has MASSIVE benefits completely aside from top speeds.

You can fault Qualcomm for their bizarre and arguably excessive pricing strategy, but at the end of the day, they are the only company that makes the best radios. They are the only company that has put the billions of dollars of R&D in to make their radios work where other radios simply don't. Apple decided that they didn't want to pay the price for the premium radios, and decided to put low-quality, poorly performing Intel radios into their supposedly premium phones, and that is 100% Apple's fault. They could have absolutely afforded to build the Xs/ Xs Max/Xr series on Qualcomm X20 radios, but they chose the inferior Intel parts instead. On top of that, we now know that whether purposefully or inadvertently they stole Qualcomm's IP in their quest to stop using Qualcomm because of their petty feud.

So while you have No Service in more places than ever, I'll have the equivalent of a DSL connection in my pocket in weak signal areas with Qualcomm X20.

You should actually bother to READ and UNDERSTAND what people are posting instead of making dumb blanket statements that prove you don't actually understand the technology or it's benefits.
[doublepost=1537970210][/doublepost]

I have no doubt that Apple did not negotiate with Qualcomm in good faith, as they seem to have a grudge against the company, and have worked very hard to put inferior Intel modems into their phones when they have to know that the Qualcomm radios are better.

However, I'm not sold on intent. I'm a huge fan of Hanlon's razor, never attribute to malice what can be adequately attributed to stupidity, so the jury is still out on that one. That being said, if you have a company that's incompetent at protecting another company's IP, that still doesn't look great for them.

No service? What century is this?

 

[falainber]

It’s not at all suspicious and it benefits appl only in the most indirect way.

You’ve never accidentally sent a mail not realizing someone was on the cc line? There’s a reason iOS supports a function to highlight non-domain email addresses in the header, though in this case it wouldn’t have helped since it was intended for a non domain email address.

As someone with experience in high tech and semiconductor industry specifically I am sure you know better. NDAs are taken very seriously. The company I work for makes sure that engineers who deal with one vendor do not work with a competing one (when NDAs are involved). If what Qualcomm is alleging is true it is a major violation not an innocent slip up.

 

[MentalFloss]

Amount of people who protects Apple is provokingly high.
Sure, innocent to proven otherwise - but how fast people became LTE design experts is hilarious - so don't pick side just yet.

Looking forward to the outcome.

I am an "LTE design expert", as you chose to call it. I worked for one of the companies involved in this lawsuit. And I worked on one of the projects this lawsuit relates to.

Am I at least allowed to pick sides here?
[doublepost=1537975645][/doublepost]

Someone working on intel modem implementation wanted Qualcomm's trade secrets. I don't know how much more blatant it can be. Very rarely will a company say, "Yeah, we're gonna steal it." This is as close to blatant IP theft as it comes.

Saying that you want something now amounts to theft?

Wow, this is as close to the concept of thoughtcrime as it comes.

 

[UnbiasedPerson]

The only thing it proves is that apple doesn’t negotiate with Samsung.

Who could blame them after Samsung stole their ip.


If a thief stole from you would you pay them?

Thought so.

Samsung isn't a thief. Samsung just copies art style and direction (though they have started coming up with their own art language now), and the legality of copying someone's style is kind of murky.
Apple is a blatant tech thief.

There's a big difference.

 

[Heineken]

Samsung isn't a thief. Samsung just copies art style and direction (though they have started coming up with their own art language now), and the legality of copying someone's style is kind of murky.
Apple is a blatant tech thief.

There's a big difference.

And where is your proof?

 

[FFR]

Samsung isn't a thief. Samsung just copies art.
Apple is a tech thief.

There's a big difference.

I honestly don’t think you know the difference but courts do
And The courts say Samsung is a thief.

“Court rules that Samsung stole trade secrets from TSMC”
https://www.phonearena.com/news/Cou...tole-trade-secrets-from-TSMC_id73055/comments

Samsung Steals Trade Secrets from TSMC
https://samsungrumors.net/samsung-steals-trade-secrets-from-tsmc/

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/3ik8o8/taiwan_top_court_rules_that_samsung_stole_tsmc/

Samsung ordered to pay Apple more than $1BILLION after jury says they STOLE patented iPhone designs - and now faces having to pull ALL their cellphones and tablets from the U.S.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...BILLION-jury-says-STOLE-patented-designs.html


Are you calling apples ip art?
That’s a first.

 

[FFR]

And where is your proof?

I think he is making stuff up.

 

[rjjacobson]

Obviously you don't care to read my posts or actually LEARN anything, because if you did, you would now know that 4x4 MIMO uses antenna diversity to help with weak signals, so it doesn't matter if you ever find a tower with 4x4 MIMO, you will still benefit from it. Antenna diversity will help AT&T and Verizon customers a lot, and T-Mobile customers even more, since T-Mobile isn't as good as AT&T and Verizon in many, many areas.

What market are you in? AT&T is very good in many places, other places it's not. However, the point about 5x CA still stands, as it can be used as 4x CA or 3x CA on carriers and markets that have that configuration, and as part of Gigabit LTE, 4x CA still has MASSIVE benefits completely aside from top speeds.

You can fault Qualcomm for their bizarre and arguably excessive pricing strategy, but at the end of the day, they are the only company that makes the best radios. They are the only company that has put the billions of dollars of R&D in to make their radios work where other radios simply don't. Apple decided that they didn't want to pay the price for the premium radios, and decided to put low-quality, poorly performing Intel radios into their supposedly premium phones, and that is 100% Apple's fault. They could have absolutely afforded to build the Xs/ Xs Max/Xr series on Qualcomm X20 radios, but they chose the inferior Intel parts instead. On top of that, we now know that whether purposefully or inadvertently they stole Qualcomm's IP in their quest to stop using Qualcomm because of their petty feud.

So while you have No Service in more places than ever, I'll have the equivalent of a DSL connection in my pocket in weak signal areas with Qualcomm X20.

You should actually bother to READ and UNDERSTAND what people are posting instead of making dumb blanket statements that prove you don't actually understand the technology or it's benefits.

My experience is where AT&T is good in town I am getting blazing speeds still today since getting my Xs on the 21st.

Where I am having issues that have degraded a bit is at home. My house on the east side of town is close to interstate and towers but apparently not mine so I get typically one bar and if lucky and stand right weak second bar. For years with all my iPhones I have supplemented with an apple airport (currently last generation extreme). My speed limits are what package I have with isp.

What I am seeing is that in house with my split bands of 2.4 and 5ghz my phones have always wanted to go to the 2.4 which is stronger. But my Xs is staying on the 5 when I choose it and am at house. Coming home when I am at front door I have to go and rechoose the 5 because it sees the 2.4 first. In house I am getting the same results with Xs as I did with X and earlier phones (going to 2.4 when first coming home but staying on 5 once i choose it, seeing the 5 as weaker in further parts of house). But when outside with aluminum siding and several rooms between the already weaker WiFI is typically even weaker with the Xs than all my earlier phones. I rely on it because cell is problematic wth all my iPhones. But over half the time if I am not near room with Wifi the Xs is having hard time staying with the Wifi unlike previous generations of iphones.

So not a killer issue for me like some — celll is weaker in my already poor signal area and WiFI outside a bit weaker — most of time am in house and still can rely on my WiFi solution to weak AT&T signal.. FYI I have been on AT&T since early iphone and the old grandfathered unlimited plan still is far cheaper than the so called unlimited of carriers today so I put up with this, and Verizon my kids have is not much stronger at my house so it must be bad place even though close to interstate and towers mile/half mile.

 

[Michael Goff]

Your right, do you know which technology Qualcomm is accusing apple of stealing?

I’m curious.

If you read the articls, it states that Qualcomm is accusing Apple of sharing its source code and tools for LTE modems. It isn't that hard to actually read the article you're responding to.

 

[FFR]

If you read the articls, it states that Qualcomm is accusing Apple of sharing its source code and tools for LTE modems. It isn't that hard to actually read the article you're responding to.

Thanks for the info.
I will probably read it this weekend.

Just at an event today so not much time read the details.

 

[Michael Goff]

Thanks for the info.
I will probably read it this weekend.

Just at an event today so not much time read the details.

Hope you enjoy yourself. I get to go to an event today too. It's called working a 12 hour shift (most likely, won't know until I get there).

 

[jeremiah256]

Qualcomm also believed that they could charge sep patents based on the total price of the phone instead of the component involved.

If it were true the would sue intel first not apple.
Apple is the customer
Intel is the manufacturer

Apple is the one with the trillion dollars. I’m sure if Qualcomm wins against Apple, they’re going after INTEL next.

 

[FFR]

Hope you enjoy yourself. I get to go to an event today too. It's called working a 12 hour shift (most likely, won't know until I get there).

It’s actually for business, it’s not any better.

Lots of beautiful women though so there’s that, but not in much in the way of conversations for the next hour.

Thanks again.

 

[Blaze4G]

If you read the articls, it states that Qualcomm is accusing Apple of sharing its source code and tools for LTE modems. It isn't that hard to actually read the article you're responding to.

If you read the articls, it states that Qualcomm is accusing Apple of sharing its source code and tools for LTE modems. It isn't that hard to actually read the article you're responding to.

Lol I'm debating with this FFR guy in a next thread because he fails to read as well. He even posted a link without reading contradiction himself.

 

[FFR]

Apple is the one with the trillion dollars. I’m sure if Qualcomm wins against Apple, they’re going after INTEL next.

Sure a trillion and counting and that has no bearing on the case.

If they win, from what I understand they are trying to delay, not a good sign for Qualcomm.

It’s still highly irregular to target the customer with a lawsuit and not the manufacturer.

 

[FFR]

Lol I'm debating with this FFR guy in a next thread because he fails to read as well. He even posted a link without reading contradiction himself.

Not much of a debate when I said you were right.

Not reading much today either. But kind of said that a few posts up.