Qualcomm Successfully Appeals $1.05 Billion EU Fine for Paying Apple to Use Its Mobile Chips

[MacRumors]

Qualcomm has successfully appealed a 997 million euro ($1.05 billion) fine from EU antitrust regulators for paying Apple to use its LTE chips in iOS devices (via Reuters).

The fine was imposed by regulators in 2018 after a European Commission investigation concluded that payments to Apple from 2011 to 2016 were made with the sole aim of blocking Qualcomm's LTE chipset market rivals, such as Intel.

The General Court, Europe's second-highest, annulled the EU finding and faulted the EU competition enforcer, Margrethe Vestager, over the handling of the case.

"A number of procedural irregularities affected Qualcomm's rights of defence and invalidate the Commission's analysis of the conduct alleged against Qualcomm," judges said.

"The Commission did not provide an analysis which makes it possible to support the findings that the payments concerned had actually reduced Apple's incentives to switch to Qualcomm's competitors in order to obtain supplies of LTE chipsets for certain iPad models to be launched in 2014 and 2015."

The EU competition enforcer can appeal the judgement to the EU Court of Justice, Europe's highest court. The Commission said it would carefully study the judgement before considering its next steps.

The judgement is another painful setback to Vestager's crackdown on Big Tech. The loss represents Vestager's second major defeat after failing to get the court's backing in January for a 1.06 billion euro fine on Intel 12 years ago for engaging in illegal anti-competitive practices to exclude rival AMD. Before January, the Commission hadn't lost a big antitrust case in more than 20 years.

Qualcomm's fine is one of several imposed by the EU antitrust chief on companies including Google, Facebook, and Amazon over anti-competitive practices.

Article Link: Qualcomm Successfully Appeals $1.05 Billion EU Fine for Paying Apple to Use Its Mobile Chips

 

[Leon Ze Professional]

In 2022: Big Tech Companies vs European Commission
Scoreline 2-0 in favour of Big Tech Companies.

Tonight the European Commission will be licking there wounds to there bruised ego.

 

[entropys]

How will the euroweenie bureaucrats retaliate now?
They will not stop until they restore the divine right of kings. And they believe they will be the kings.

 

[djphat2000]

And here I thought the EU Commission knew what they were doing.
I guess not. At least all the time.

 

[danieldk]

Tonight the European Commission will be licking there wounds to there bruised ego.

Or maybe the conclusion is that the system works as it should? There have also been many EC verdicts before that stand after appeals. But it's nice that companies have a recourse and that the recourse works when it's a valid objection to the fine.

 

[Mitochris]

For some this ruling will show that the system is working, while for others it will suggest that it is broken. Pick which ever you want and be a d*ck about it.

 

[5232152]

In 2022: Big Tech Companies vs European Commission
Scoreline 2-0 in favour of Big Tech Companies.

Tonight the European Commission will be licking there wounds to there bruised ego.

Don't think sucking up to big cooperates instead of "We, the people" is going to land you job with them on this forum, sorry.

Jokes aside, it opens to reconsider a lot of European lawmaking to crack down on these sketchy AF deals.

 

[xDKP]

And here I thought the EU Commission knew what they were doing.
I guess not. At least all the time.

Absolutely not the first time that Vestagers cases is not going through - Another massive blow.

 

[falkon-engine]

Hopefully their mandate for usb-c doesn’t suffer a similar fate in the courts.

 

[Leon Ze Professional]

Don't think sucking up to big cooperates instead of "We, the people" is going to land you job with them on this forum, sorry.

Jokes aside, it opens to reconsider a lot of European lawmaking to crack down on these sketchy AF deals.

@5232152, my humour obviously flew right over your head like a Roberto Carlos free kick!

 

[Martinpa]

Hopefully their mandate for usb-c doesn’t suffer a similar fate in the courts.

Hopefully it does…

Should most tech devices have USB-C? In 2022, yeah. Should it be any governing body’s role to force companies to do the switch? No.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

In 2022: Big Tech Companies vs European Commission
Scoreline 2-0 in favour of Big Tech Companies.

Tonight the European Commission will be licking there wounds to there bruised ego.

You’re mistaking a system of checks and balance. But I do wonder what’s other score they lost? DMA passed, Google have lost its appeals.

 

[mansplains]

Hopefully it does…

Should most tech devices have USB-C? In 2022, yeah. Should it be any governing body’s role to force companies to do the switch? No.

Come on, the government exists to help regulate the biggest issues we face. I can't think of anything more pressing than mobile phone ports /s

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Hopefully it does…

Should most tech devices have USB-C? In 2022, yeah. Should it be any governing body’s role to force companies to do the switch? No.

The law explicitly links to the usb forum. The moment they USB consortium change anything it will change the law automatically.

 

[IamTimCook]

Good to know that these aren’t one sided decisions handed down with no way to argue your case.
Makes me feel better about the rouge EU “law makers” trying to shape tech in their own eyes, now knowing that the high courts can just overturn a ruling as being “just plain silly” to rational thinking people.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Good to know that these aren’t one sided decisions handed down with no way to argue your case.
Makes me feel better about the rouge EU “law makers” trying to shape tech in their own eyes, now knowing that the high courts can just overturn a new law as being “just plain silly” to rational thinking people.

They can’t overturn laws, but they can overturn ruling. Courts don’t have the authority to make laws. Only the Supreme Court can do that

 

[IamTimCook]

They can’t overturn laws, but they can overturn ruling. Courts don’t have the authority to make laws. Only the Supreme Court can do that

Thanks, the proper way to express the mandates these commissions are handing out was escaping me this early in the morning. I wasn't too sure if the process of Bill to Law worked the same way in the EU.
Will adjust my post...

 

[erikkfi]

Every loss is an opportunity to learn for next time.

 

[alexe]

It's really a shame, we as consumers need successful verdicts on anti-competitive behaviour now more than ever.

 

[huges84]

It’s 100% anti-competitive to pay your customers specifically not to use your competitor’s products. Especially when it’sa huge customer like Apple that will severely affect sales of the competitor. This is clearly unethical and most likely illegal.

It sounds like the decision was overturned based on technicalities of how the prosecution process was handled, not a finding that Qualcomm was innocent. Hopefully the issues can be rectified and Qualcomm gets punished like they should.

 

[alexe]

How will the euroweenie bureaucrats retaliate now?
They will not stop until they restore the divine right of kings. And they believe they will be the kings.

You don't realize that strong antitrust regulation makes your life and your world better, do you? It's in your interest. If it weren't for antitrust regulation, AT&T would be the only telephone company in the US and you'd be paying three times what you do now for your phone contract. And many innovations would never have happened for a lack of competition.

Don't always defend the corporations, be happy that regulators exist, too. Because you as a lonely consumer have absolutely zero power against the Amazon's and Apple's of the world.

 

[I7guy]

You don't realize that strong antitrust regulation makes your life and your world better, do you?[…]

Like everything else, if misused there is no benefit to my life or the world.

 

[IamTimCook]

If it weren't for antitrust regulation, AT&T would be the only telephone company in the US and you'd be paying three times what you do now for your phone contract.

True, but don't place "Everyone must use the same ports", "We demand that you ship chargers", "Your commission rates, that are the same as all proprietary platforms, are too high", "Make your App Store like the other App Stores" in the same nice little box for convince or argument sake.

 

[NightFox]

It always seems in these forums that so many people have such a knee-jerk reaction against anything proposed by the EU or national governments that they just adopt a default position against it without even thinking about the nature of the ruling. What we're talking about here is Apple making decisions on the components they're putting in iPhones based not on what offers the best quality/price point, but on who pays them the most. How is that good for the consumer?

Yet again, people falling over themselves to protect Apple's corporate wellbeing ahead of their own individual interests. Hint: put yourself first, Apple will be just fine.

 

[Martinpa]

The law explicitly links to the usb forum. The moment they USB consortium change anything it will change the law automatically.

What do you think Europeans have? Half of Europe was under soviet occupation and dictatorship for 60 years, and the rest have lived under kings and rulers. For a thousand years

What if the next new thing isn’t brought on by the USB consortium? What if at any given time, the USB consortium specs limit what a certain company (could be Apple or any other tech company) would like to do with a single port? Standards are great and easier, and should be used whenever it is the best solution. Standards are also slow to change. At the time Apple premiered lightning, microUSB was flimsy and couldn’t be inserted either side. It would be two more years before USB-C’s specs were published.