Or, perhaps, vice-versa. Let's see how this ends up. Could be with Apple looking like Samsung.
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 Seeks Import Ban on AT&T and T-Mobile iPhone 8 and iPhone X Models
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or, perhaps, vice-versa. Let's see how this ends up. Could be with Apple looking like Samsung.
Never ever going to happen but good luck Qualcomm.
Qualcomm has been trying so hard lately. They see that everyone is moving away from them and rather than pushing tech that others would want, they're trying to sue them to make them stay. Not gonna work.
Qualcomm has been trying so hard lately. They see that everyone is moving away from them and rather than pushing tech that others would want, they're trying to sue them to make them stay. Not gonna work.
It would be a shame if the only iPhones allowed to be imported were the Unlocked and Verizon versions that supported all carriers and bands, that also test as getting better signal reception. I know I would have preferred the Qualcomm versions over my T-Mobile iPhone...
I couldn’t find a perfect answer, but Qualcomm may be valued around $85B? Why doesn’t Apple just buy the company, dissolve it, fire it’s executives, suck it’s patents out, hire it’s engineers and tear down the ugly duckling from the inside out. And they’d still be able to collect royalty from Samsung and possibly renegotiate Samsung’s prices to Apple. I’m so glad I don’t run Apple, I’d actually consider this.
Yeah! <grabs pitchfork>
Those AirPods, iPhone X, iPad Pros, MacBooks, and other class-leading products and services suck! Let’s bring back the other guy who was responsible for MobileMe!
(Obviously I’m being overly sarcastic, but cmon, TC isn’t a bad guy and you seem to forget he was hand-picked by the guy that every Apple fan adores. I mean Steve wasn’t going to just hand the company that he spent his entire life work to someone who wasn’t good enough)
Enough with the lawsuits...on the other hand, if T-Mobile iPhone X’s have an import ban, I could make a pretty penny flipping mine.... more lawsuits!!!
Qualcomm doesn't charge Apple a higher rate. In fact, Apple was even getting huge "rebates". So not sure where you got your ideas.
It doesn't matter if Apple goes full Intel. Just as it didn't matter back when Apple only used Infineon modems.
Qualcomm got/gets the same royalty no matter whose modem chip is used. As do many other cellular standard contributors.
Qualcomm today announced that it has filed three new patent infringement claims against Apple, accusing the Cupertino company of violating a total of 16 Qualcomm patents with its most recent iPhones, including the iPhone X.
Most of the patents in question cover technologies like carrier aggregation, memory designs, and power management features that are designed help to reduce battery usage, but in one claim, Qualcomm says Apple is using a depth-based image enhancement technique for Portrait mode that violates a Qualcomm patent.
Qualcomm is also filing a new complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) concerning five of the patents, and it is asking the ITC to ban imports of iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X models that use chips from Intel, aka AT&T and T-Mobile devices in the United States.
The complaint with the ITC follows a previous filing in July that saw Qualcomm ask for an import ban on iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus models equipped with Intel modem chips, along with some iPad models. Qualcomm has not asked for a ban on iPhones that use Qualcomm LTE chips, with the reasoning that a more limited exclusion order is more likely to be granted.
In the lawsuit, Qualcomm once again says its inventions form the "very core" of "modern mobile communication," and that without Qualcomm technology, Apple products "would lose much of their consumer appeal."
Qualcomm is seeking damages in an amount to be proven at trial, a permanent injunction against Apple, and attorneys fees.
Qualcomm's latest filing follows a countersuit from Apple that was filed earlier this week. Apple claims that Qualcomm's Snapdragon chips infringe on "at least" eight battery life patents owned by Apple.
The legal battle between Apple and Qualcomm kicked off in January of this year, and it has escalated rapidly over the course of the last several months. It is not clear if the ITC will agree to investigate the claims Qualcomm has made against Apple, but this will be a legal battle that spans several years, so Apple devices are in no danger of being banned anytime soon.
Article Link: Qualcomm Seeks Import Ban on AT&T and T-Mobile iPhone 8 and iPhone X Models
I'd LOVE to see the timing on the new patent infringement submission that was done today/yesterday. I'm curious to see the timing as it may co-related to Apple's countersue yesterday and Qualcomm's stock starting off lower after yesterday's closing hours and middary rise and fall just before closing today.
https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/QCOM:US
Qualcomm develops technology and patents it.
Apple uses said technology in their phones, refuses to pay for it, violating the patent.
Qualcomm wants restitution.
How is Qualcomm the bad guy here? Am I missing something?
Apple uses said technology in their phones, refuses to pay for it, violating the patent.
Qualcomm wants restitution.
How is Qualcomm the bad guy here? Am I missing something?
The real problem is the broad interpretation of patent laws that allow this patent trolling business model.
its worst than that - Qualcomm charges a percentage of the total selling price of the phone regardless of whether the device uses a Qualcomm chip or NOT- great business for them obviously
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...nsing-payments-to-qualcomm-as-fight-escalates
I have hated Qualcomm since 2006, when they terminated Eudora, the best email software ever, without releasing the source code as open source or selling it as closed source to another company.
If I understand it correctly, and someone correct me if I'm not, but the sticking point is that Qualcomm charges a royalty fee to use their IP, and then on top of that requires customers to obtain a license to use the IP and bases the fee for the license on the total sale price of the device, not just the price of Qualcomm's contribution to the device. As an example, under Qualcomm's terms, Qualcomm is getting more money from Apple because of the TrueDepth camera system despite Qualcomm having nothing whatsoever to do with TrueDepth camera system. The FTC and other governmental jurisdictions have started to take issue with Qualcomm's actions in this regard.
Someone, did I get that right?
Yes, exactly the same as Motorola, LG, Nokia, Ericsson, Huawei, and many other contributors to the cellular standards.
There's absolutely nothing unusual or wrong about this common patent licensing method. It allows for most of the world to buy low profit phones, while higher profit phones which benefit from the resultant worldwide network pay more.
Nope. The royalty method is only questioned right now by Apple. Governments have supported it.
The beef that various government groups around the world had with Qualcomm was over other business methods such as requiring full licensing of all their patents in bulk, and not giving much in return for cross licenses.
They can't just buy any company on the planet. All they can do is make offers, and offers can be refused.
They have a near monopoly by being the creator of the system that was adopted by everyone through a general consensus; whether or not it was the best.
The fact that they are raising Apple's royalties for not exclusively buying chips from them is anticompetitive (imo). Especially since they get the return on the chips (for their IP) from Intel.
Last edited:
Qualcomm spent billions developing much of today's 3G and 4G cellular technology, and others eagerly adopted what they created. But they're certainly not the only contributors.
They didn't raise their rates. Heck, Apple doesn't even have a Qualcomm license.
Instead, Foxconn, Pegatron and the other assemblers use their own licenses, and their rates haven't changed no matter whose modem they used or whose phone they built.
Last edited:
Then why is the price of royalties calculated by the price of the device such technology is put in and not the modem itself?
Why can't you develop or assemble wireless communications technology without licensing their patents?
Absolutely no one is saying they shouldn't be paid for their technology here. But their payments need to be fair and just: these large manufacturers and other people believe not. Others, like me, believe their actions have been anticompetitive.
Last edited:
Because there’s nothing there but patents.
That would be rewarding bad behavior.
I think it's how Qualcomm deems restitution is warranted.
Qualcomm has patents (say we focus on hardware). The patents are licensed by chip manufacturers and thus paid per chip. Apple (and other phone manufacturers) are customers, and buys a number of these chips and sells phones using the chips that have these patents. Qualcomm believes it's their rite to get $$ by manufacturers that make & ship phones using their patents, after already receiving the full moneys from the manufacturers of the chips that already licensed such pantents. Apple (and other phone manufacturers) don't believe this is fair use for technology that is mandatory/de-facto standard for ANY cellphone to work. I think that's the gist of it.
It's like being taxed for federal and state/provincial sales tax for items you purchase, only to be charged yet again based on the total income you've made above a very low amount at the end of the year. We'll at least that has a variable (total amount made vs per item purchased).
No question. Steve was a Deity.
[doublepost=1512098740][/doublepost]
All this delusional litigation by Qualcomm will simply make Broadcom’s Hostile Takeover easier.