UK Consumer Watchdog Sues Qualcomm for Allegedly Breaching Competition Law

[Ursadorable]

The last decent thing that shipped from Qualcomm was Eudora.

 

[I7guy]

[…]
The handset price and features are used as the basis for the license so expensive phones (Samsung, Apple, etc.) subsidize technology for emerging markets.

Can’t blame apple (or any other company) for wanting to mitigate the fees based on selling price for the same chip.

 

[Quu]

That is absolutely false. People will need to understand one thing.

Your Love of Apple, or any entity replacing Apple, does not automatically made that entity's rival or enemy evil. So please stop making these claims.

Firstly I do not love Apple. I do however love reading, perhaps you should try it some time.

From this very article:

In 2018, Qualcomm was hit with a 997 million euro ($1.2 billion) fine by EU antitrust regulators for paying Apple to use its LTE chips in iOS devices.

Literally the exact same thing Intel did.

 

[techwhiz]

Can’t blame apple (or any other company) for wanting to mitigate the fees based on selling price for the same chip.

Here is the fee schedule link: https://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/files/qualcomm-5g-nr-royalty-terms-statement.pdf

• An effective running royalty rate of 2.275% of the selling price of branded single-mode 5G handsets; and
• An effective running royalty rate of 3.25% of the selling price of branded multi-mode (3G/4G/5G) handsets.

They charge different rates on the features and modes of the device.
It's not secret and you have a choice. The choice is don't use their technology.
They sell chips and the license is separate from the cost of the device.
So it's two parts; cost of chip and cost license (device).
Since I work in the chip industry it makes perfect sense to me. The cost of manufacturing the silicon is one cost.
The cost of the license is another.
People will say it's "double dipping".
Okay so they raise the cost of the device and everyone pays the higher price. (Apple and everyone pays one price).
They then charge a license of others just using the patents.
They make the same money, if not more, and the emerging country suffers because the cost of the low end handset just went up.

 

[ksec]

Firstly I do not love Apple. I do however love reading, perhaps you should try it some time.

From this very article:



Literally the exact same thing Intel did.

The difference is a monopolistic action with Intel's case and exclusivity in Qualcomm's case in EU ( or basically anywhere outside US ).

People will say it's "double dipping".

Well not "people". Just Apple's narrative. One could have counter the same argument with Apple's devices, Apple Developer Account, and App Store commission as triple dipping. I just wished the media covered more of Qualcomm's side to have a balanced view. Instead of simply painting any subject as villain. As far as I am aware only Cnet managed to do that.

 

[I7guy]

[...]
Well not "people". Just Apple's narrative. One could have counter the same argument with Apple's devices, Apple Developer Account, and App Store commission as triple dipping. I just wished the media covered more of Qualcomm's side to have a balanced view. Instead of simply painting any subject as villain. As far as I am aware only Cnet managed to do that.

The argument isn't even the same as enrollment into the Apple Developer Program is strictly voluntary. Apple doesn't hold any essential patents for enrolling in the app store. But it's a nice spin.