Qualcomm Wins Import Ban on iPhone 6s Through iPhone X in China, Apple Says All iPhone Models Remain Available

[tromboneaholic]

If it’s a fight you want, Qualcomm, it’s a fight you will get.

According to Apple, iOS 12 invalidates their patents anyways, so I don’t expect this to have any impact on Apple.

The way Qualcomm ran to make a big spectacle out of this is also very telling. They clearly have an incentive to make it seem like they are better positioned to go up against Apple in courts around the world.

The court desicion was last week, but Qualcomm waited until right before the stock market opened to issue a press release. Meanwhile, all reports indicate even the older iPhone models are for sale in China.

This was a weak move by Qualcomm to affect Apple stock. I think it will backfire.

 

[skys15]

They’ve all copied something somewhere so maybe nobody should be able to sell anything anywhere.

 

[Defthand]

I think patents that don't specify how you will do a certain thing are ideas and not technology, but don't get me started.

At the risk of being off topic, I agree. When the patent system was conceived, inventors had to submit detailed drawings illustrating the viability of an idea. Some inventions required working prototypes! Maybe I’m unaware of a similar requirement that isn’t evident when Apple’s concept patents are reported on. I feel if a patent holder doesn’t license or manufacture his idea within ten years, the idea should be public domain.

 

[ulyssesric]

It seems like the patents infringed are utility patents. Can Apple work-around with software update?

For what I've experienced when dealing with these chip makers, they are greedy as hell. They have a patent that is part of the standard, and they'll abuse it. And they avoid the FRAND principle by separating it into two parts.

First they implemented part of the patented feature/algorithm in hardware. But these hardware components can not be accessed through common means. You have to use the firmware provided bu them to activate these components. So for the smartphone manufacturers, you have to pay three times: the cost of chip, license fee for the locked hardware components inside the chip / module, and the license fee for the firmware. And for the firmware part they're charging you the annual fee that they can set the price tag at will without violating the FRAND principle, because it's not part of the patent but "DLCs".

Yes it's very similar to the way that EA sells games -- you'll have to pay for the DLCs to get what should be full.

In that case, Apple could have work-around with software update. They just implement the functions of these locked components with their own software, thus they can avoid the license fee for both locked components and firmwares. Apple still need to pay for the patent license fee for using the patented algorithm or such, but the price tag are now under the control of FRAND principle.

 

[swingerofbirch]

"Duty-free Export Manufacturing Zones" and similar phrasing are used. Yes, an economic country within the main country.

Yes. I just found the article where I learned about it:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/technology/iphone-china-apple-stores.html

The import tax from the economic zone is 17% into the rest of China.

It probably advantages China in that they can attract both manufacturing from foreign companies like Apple plus keep their own brands competitive in the domestic market.

 

[robbyx]

The court desicion was last week, but Qualcomm waited until right before the stock market opened to issue a press release. Meanwhile, all reports indicate even the older iPhone models are for sale in China.

This was a weak move by Qualcomm to affect Apple stock. I think it will backfire.

I think this whole legal battle with Apple will backfire. No doubt other companies are questioning their commitment to Qualcomm components long term as they watch this saga unfold.

 

[Baymowe335]

Someone that fully understands the licensing.
Apple unilaterally decided the fees are too high.
Mind you, Samsung, OnePlus, etc. pay the same fees.

Apple claims infringement of generic patents all the time. (I think patents that don't specify how you will do a certain thing are ideas and not technology, but don't get me started).

So this is Qualcomm, going after Apple the same way Apple goes after other folks.
If Apple would just live up to it's contractual agreements this wouldn't have gone this far.

Stop acting like you understand this so well.

You literally have no idea what the details are besides the high level claims in the article.

In reality, many legal experts believe Apple is right in their original complaint and will ultimately win.

 

[chainmailr]

This is why I've been bearish on Apple. They think they can win in China. They can't.

 

[chatin]

They picked Intel to take over then filled in some blanks for them. Like letting someone struggling see your answers on a test but something Steve was always up for.

 

[Abazigal]

Someone that fully understands the licensing.
Apple unilaterally decided the fees are too high.
Mind you, Samsung, OnePlus, etc. pay the same fees.

Apple claims infringement of generic patents all the time. (I think patents that don't specify how you will do a certain thing are ideas and not technology, but don't get me started).

So this is Qualcomm, going after Apple the same way Apple goes after other folks.
If Apple would just live up to it's contractual agreements this wouldn't have gone this far.

Apple capitulated to the terms at a time when they had no other choice.

Not to mention that the fees are calculated based on a percentage of the device's final cost. Meaning that Apple pays more than Samsung or Oneplus simply by virtue of their phones costing more to make.

Now, Apple is finally in a strong enough position to fight back, and fight back Apple will. Remember, Apple is going after Qualcomm's very business model, which will ultimately impact how Qualcomm does business with every other phone manufacturer. They should all be on Apple side, and Apple is simply doing what any other company would have done had they more leverage.

Apple will fight, and Apple will win.
[doublepost=1544499864][/doublepost]

This is why I've been bearish on Apple. They think they can win in China. They can't.

Concerns over the risk Apple faces in China have been way overblown.

 

[KPandian1]

Apple unilaterally decided the fees are too high.
Mind you, Samsung, OnePlus, etc. pay the same fees.

Are you sure all companies that use Qualcomm modems and chips pay in a similar manner that Apple does? I thought Apple was the only company "stupid" enough to sign into those terms and regretted it.

I am asking from a point of not really knowing the fees structure for the others.

Can't imagine every smart and feature phone maker using anything Qualcomm are forking over such fees.

 

[chainmailr]

Concerns over the risk Apple faces in China have been way overblown.

Given that no major American tech company has gotten anywhere selling in China, it's a pretty reasonable expectation. Especially since it's hardware. The government just won't let them win there, no matter how good the outlook is at first. They have control like none other. Happened first with Cisco.

To put it a more positive way, if Apple succeeds, it'd be groundbreaking in US-China relations.

 

[KPandian1]

That is so funny!

So they design that crap in Cupertino with H1B's. Build it in China.

Ship it (using lots of carbon emissions) around the world

BUT, they can't sell it in China where they build it!

If someone told me that back in the 1970's I'd say they were bonkers. But it's reality today!

What is wrong with imported brains - H1Bs or war captures - when the local talent is focused on MBAs today?

Designed in USA - crap?

1940s - USA's entire nuclear program. German brains.

1960's The race to the moon - same.

1980s-2010s - Chinese and Indian brain drain helps USA's industry in every part; don't forget the medical professionals that USA imports.

Assembled in China - I will concede that partially. The quality of built in USA is excellent; and the Chinese are just as good. It is not T-shirt manufacturing we are talking about.

Lawyers in the USA - too many! Why?

Carbon print - it is not the single currency in these transactions; a major component, yes. Scotland used to ship their local shrimp to Taiwan/Indonesia to de-vein and clean, then ship it back to the UK to sell it. Because the Scots couldn't find labor as cheap as all the cost involved in the trip around the world! They don't do it anymore.

Same economics with assembled in China.

Can't sell in China because the industrial zones are "walled-off" entities within the host nations; India has them. Move it 100 meters into China, pay the tax.

Remember when USA, UK, Germany and most of Europe were selling products made in their lands to sell in Asia, Africa and Latin America? Now, the companies prefer or are forced to make in the lands they sell.

 

[justperry]

It really doesn't matter. China isn't stupid and have not been standing still. They've diversified globally, so that plant in the Philippines, Vietnam, or Indonesia will probably be owned by a Chinese company.

So, not manufactured in China.

 

[macbookhair]

Apple is doomed. This is the last straw.

Steve never would have allowed them to get sued like this, he'd have declared thermonuclear war on Qualcomm. Serves Tim Crook right for ripping off customers. If Apple focussed more on hardware instead of watch bands, they wouldn't get into these sticky situations.

That said, and I don't know why it is, but since Apple started using Qualcomm chips, Safari has seemed snappier.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

1940s - USA's entire nuclear program. German brains.

1960's The race to the moon - same.

Nothing wrong with your premise that we need brains from all over the world but the two examples above you give are technically wrong.

German rocket science was shared after the war, but the nuclear program in the 40s was the Manhattan Project. Nothing to do with Germans.

The race to the moon had nothing to do with Germans either. Credit for that should go to the Apollo Flight Computer Programming led by Margaret Hamilton. Without their programming skills it would have been impossible. This is how much code Margaret produced...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marga...edia/File:Margaret_Hamilton_-_restoration.jpg

 

[tromboneaholic]

Nothing wrong with your premise that we need brains from all over the world but the two examples above you give are technically wrong.

German rocket science was shared after the war, but the nuclear program in the 40s was the Manhattan Project. Nothing to do with Germans.

The race to the moon had nothing to do with Germans either. Credit for that should go to the Apollo Flight Computer Programming led by Margaret Hamilton. Without their programming skills it would have been impossible. This is how much code Margaret produced...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marga...edia/File:Margaret_Hamilton_-_restoration.jpg

Arguably, the Manhattan Project was largely successful due to brains forced to flee the Germans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milit...s#Jewish_scientists_and_the_Manhattan_Project

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Arguably, the Manhattan Project was largely successful due to brains forced to flee the Germans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milit...s#Jewish_scientists_and_the_Manhattan_Project

Some of the MP team were Jewish scientists who fled Germany, but the poster implied 'German' as if the technology was developed in Germany by Germans and taken by the US.

 

[tromboneaholic]

Some of the MP team were Jewish scientists who fled Germany, but the poster implied 'German' as if the technology was developed in Germany by Germans and taken by the US.

I agree with you, and I found it ironic that in some cases it was people Germany essentially rejected.

The poster can't have his kuchen and eat it too.

 

[KPandian1]

Some of the MP team were Jewish scientists who fled Germany, but the poster implied 'German' as if the technology was developed in Germany by Germans and taken by the US.

I agree with you, and I found it ironic that in some cases it was people Germany essentially rejected.
The poster can't have his kuchen and eat it too.

I think we are all in agreement, but missed the post's emphasis - here it is:

"1940s - USA's entire nuclear program. German brains."

I am very specific that it was German brains - and no mention of where the technology was developed. BTW, the Germans were developing the Atom bomb too - never reached the goal.

 

[Awesom-0]

I asked about this in the political segment of the forum - what is the deal with the arrest warrant and the arrest?

Did the USA really ban any Huawei products that the consumer uses directly or just the infrastructure elements?

Are American (USA) companies banned from supplying Huawei parts like the ZTE deal?

No, I have a Huawei tablet bought from Amazon.

Despite everything in the news I have not seen any actual proof of Huawei doing anything with their devices.

I setup separate accounts for everything on this and nothing has tried to access any of those accounts. And for the week I let it idle on my network I have not seen anything out of the ordinary.

I probably still won't use it for anything important but for $150, black Friday sale last year, this thing is great Reminds me of a new Nexus but made out of aluminum and much better speakers.

 

[tromboneaholic]

I think we are all in agreement, but missed the post's emphasis - here it is:

"1940s - USA's entire nuclear program. German brains."

I am very specific that it was German brains - and no mention of where the technology was developed. BTW, the Germans were developing the Atom bomb too - never reached the goal.

I'm sorry, but you don't get to call them German brains after they fled Germany.

We used to call people who left another country and came here in search of freedom "Americans" until recently.

 

[KPandian1]

I'm sorry, but you don't get to call them German brains after they fled Germany.

We used to call people who left another country and came here in search of freedom "Americans" until recently.

Now, we are drifting and deflecting.

The OP was about "imported brains"!
[doublepost=1544538507][/doublepost]

Eventually they will move, wait until manufacturing gets too expensive in China.

Not seeing cheap labour shortage in China anytime soon - 1.35 billion people to choose from, unlike the smaller nations.

India also has similar numbers, but it is too complex, the infrastructure is poor even in concentrated industrial zones.

 

[jeffg1]

And you would have to prove that. Let's apply that to you. You walk into a Walmart and shoplift and you get caught so you're arrested and punished. A few years later you walk into that same store but this time someone else does the shoplifting but they accuse and arrest you again because you previously shoplifted even though you didn't do it the second time.

Ok, good point, now look at it from another point of view. You sell a product, you agree to sell it to one company, yes you have competition, but the competition never had the ability to use the instructions, processes and other needed items to make yourself available to Apple, then magically they have the same set of instructions, what would you think happened? You cant physically prove it, but it did happen. And if anyone is in denial, just look at intel, and it is public information at this point, when intel was losing the CPU processor race, they agreed to co fab AMD processors and stole the fab process from them.

 

[justperry]

Ok, good point, now look at it from another point of view. You sell a product, you agree to sell it to one company, yes you have competition, but the competition never had the ability to use the instructions, processes and other needed items to make yourself available to Apple, then magically they have the same set of instructions, what would you think happened? You cant physically prove it, but it did happen. And if anyone is in denial, just look at intel, and it is public information at this point, when intel was losing the CPU processor race, they agreed to co fab AMD processors and stole the fab process from them.

MR rules:

Rules:

1. Sources. If you claim that something's a fact, back it up with a source. If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts. If you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread.

https://macrumors.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201327723-MacRumors-Rules-for-Appropriate-Debate