This is how it works. Say I have a FRAND patent. I charge everyone 10 dollars a unit. But you say you won't pay that, you're a potentially huge customer and I'm afraid you'll challenge the validity of the patents. So I'm willing to accept less from you. But if I do that, then my 10 dollar rate is not sustainable - it's no longer "non discrimatory." So everyone else gets to pay less. I don't want that. So instead I say "hey, you pay 10 dollars too, but if You Agree to assist with engineering (don't worry - no work involved) we will pay you back 4 dollars a unit so you end up paying only 6."
That's what's going on here. It's an end run around ND in FRAND. But Qualcomm refused to pay because allegedly apple employees testified against Qualcomm in the Korean investigation. That's why Qualcomm doesn't want to call it a "rebate" but that's what it is.
And if they can't sue each other over patents, then why did Qualcomm just sue Apple over patents? (Not that such a clause would be legally binding anyway).
there's lots of supposition in your statement that isn't directly verifiable.
Qualcomm isn't suing Apple over patents. they're suing them over not honouring their side of the contract. once Qualcomm believes Apple is not honouring their side of the agreement, then the agreement isn't enforceable since it was already broken, thus allowing QC to sue.
the problem with this case is there's a lot of finger wagging, and a lot of things being claimed without evidence here.
if we want to break it down to ONLY what we legitimately know.
1. QualComm invented CDMA network technologies and require that anyone using CDMA pays a CDMA license. This FRAND based and all companies are supposedly getting the same deal.
2. Qualcomm doesn't charge Apple directly for this license. it is paid for by the manufacturer on behalf of Apple and passed through as a part of manufacturing costs of the device. This has been the practice for years, even prior to Apple's iPhone and is applicable to All uses of CDMA.
3. Apple claims they should no longer be paying the rates they've been paying for years. claims the money that Qualcomm has been giving to Apple for X purposes is a rebate on those license fees. Qualcomm claims they're part of an agreement to help pay for implementation and future research and is not a rebate of the CDMA license.
4. Apple refuses to continue to pay, so they withold payments on the licenses to their manufacturers and then force those manufacturers to stop paying their existing royalties to QualComm
this is all we know, anything else we're guessing on