Actually, Qualcomm isn't and can't say that because it would be an admission that they are in violation of FRAND, with the ND being non-discriminitory for those patents that are considered essential. One of Apple's central arguments is that they are being charged more for the same technology because Qualcomm is charging based on price of phone, which means every time Apple develops or adds something new, e.g., OLED screen, to a phone, Qualcomm gets paid more. The other argument that has Qualcomm wetting its pants is the double-dipping argument. Based on the recent Supreme Court decision with Lexmark printers that, in essence, says you can't charge for the equipment and then demand a license to use it (Lexmark wanted to prevent companies/customers from refilling their used cartridges and the Court said license for customers went along with purchase), it has to be one or the other. Qualcomm has been doing exactly that and a fair reading of the Lexmark case is that Qualcomm has overcharged Apple and others billions of dollars and the license to use their chips should be inherent in the purchase of the chips. If the courts agree with Apple, Qualcomm will be decimated. These lawsuits by Qualcomm are merely trying, perhaps futilely, to gain some leverage by putting issues on the table to negotiate their way out of the quagmire they are in. Keep in mind they are being sued by other companies and by more than one government.
