And it starts this week. Follow it...
12 replies (most recent on top)
We knew it was a non starter
All done
fat lady started singing all u naysayers. check mate, game over.
All iPods have modems. WLAN.
Some tablets and PCs have cellular modems, but they don't sell as well as those with only WLAN modems.
Maybe I'm the only one who has a company laptop with a cellular modem that has never even been enabled. Qualcomm must not value cellular data very much, unless maybe many others have it enabled on their company issued PCs.
The phone vs iPod comparison comes with some problems.
A recent court case put a value of $1.41 per device on 3 none SEP patents. That's more than 10% of what Apple pays (or should pay off they would honor the contract that they signed...) for 0.002% of the QCOM patents that they have access too. Draw your own conclusions on whether Apple is overcharged...
It's obvious that Apple is desperate. Launching credit card services to try to grow revenue, while haven't done any innovation for years. They're trying to squeeze or acquire all their key technology suppliers. With Tim Cook as CEO, Apple runs the risk of being the next Nokia...
It's not the amount of the royalty that is the basis of Apple's case (and many others against Qualcomm). The legal basis for the case and any victory will be made on what conditions that royalty was calculated. Read fosspatents.com and educate yourselves..
Last iPod that came out had some specs as iPhone at that time, except that it didn't have modem. iPod has not been updated in years because consumers find it useless without the modem.
Would be a long shot for Qualcomm to win this in court. Most none SEP Qualcomm patents are dismissed in court when challenged. Even the Qualcomm SEP patents get dismissed when challenged.
When you compare what we demand for phone patents and compare to other parent holders, it's nuts to none Qualcomm stock holders.
How can anyone compare an iPod to an iPhone? Ipods have a low res camera and display, less processing power, RAM and flash, etc etc. Phones have multiple cameras, vivid high res and larger displays, larger batteries, more and faster memory, more sensors, face recognition, etc etc
You get it, you just don't want to admit it, not even to yourself. I also have much a stake, and I'm scared thinking about the inevitable outcome. I only hope the courts go easy on us, otherwise we are toast.
Lawyers often say a decision where neither size is happy is a good decision. I don't expect to be happy when all is said and decided.
QTL business model will change forever.. QCOM will reduce to a chip company. Get ready to transition from Golden age to iron age.
I’ll be watching the stock closely. So hard to tell how the market will respond to the trial. I have no idea which horse to bet on here.
Any customer we have may want to try to negotiate a better deal with us... Yet, Apple’s demands are quite nuts and without any substance. They want it for (almost) free
https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/14/18307820/apple-qualcomm-lawsuit-patents-modem-exclusivity-antitrust-monopoly
The heart of Apple’s argument is that a $7.50 royalty on every single iPhone (no matter how much an iPhone sells for at retail) is "exorbitant" and the ~$13.50 Apple would otherwise pay if they did not have that exclusivity rebate is "extremely exorbitant".
Qualcomm owns more phone related patents than any other company when it comes to CDMA, HSPA/WCDMA, LTE, and now 5G. (Other companies have many more patents that relate to other aspects of the network) The entire difference between an iPod Touch and an iPhone is Qualcomm’s patents, and the price that Apple sells an iPhone is far, far greater than what they sell an iPod at, which only goes to prove just how valuable these patents really are.
Not only that, but these patents are Qualcomm’s property and the only thing you can actually do with a patent is prevent someone else from using them by forcing the courts to block shipments of your devices. Qualcomm has done just that in the courts up to this point and this week will show that Apple needs to pay what Qualcomm wants them to pay because Apple can’t set the value of property it doesn’t own.
At the heart of the conflict is one core question: how much is Qualcomm’s technology worth? Apple claims that Qualcomm has demanded excessive fees to use its modems and patents, while Qualcomm asserts that Apple is using the legal system to try to get a good deal on its technology. It’s a critical question for the entire industry — you can’t make a modern smartphone without coming into contact with Qualcomm’s patents, so the outcome of these lawsuits could have an enormous effect on every company that manufactures phones, as well as Qualcomm’s bottom line.
In recent months, the battle has escalated. Qualcomm claimed that Apple stole “vast swaths” of its “confidential information and trade secrets,” and it’s chipped away at Apple with small but meaningful court victories, leading to partial iPhone bans in Germany and China.
Now, the main event has finally arrived. On Monday, Apple and Qualcomm will face off in San Diego federal court, and Qualcomm will be forced to answer Apple’s accusations that its patent costs are unreasonable and its licensing terms are unfair. If it can’t, then Qualcomm risks losing a chunk of the billions of dollars it currently makes from patent licensing.