“No overcompensation. No overleveraging. No double-dipping. No restrictions that go beyond what the Patent Act allows. That’s the message here,” Mueller writes. “Presumably, some people in another Washington DC building are now reading the Supreme Court decision: the lawyers working on the FTC’s case against Qualcomm.”
“Patent exhaustion as a concept has been strengthened today, and its profile in certain other cases will likely be even higher now,” Mueller writes. “While Apple takes certain positions when it enforces its own patents (and would rather avoid Supreme Court review of a highly controversial Federal Circuit decision in its favor), exhaustion is not an issue in Apple v. Samsung but it does play a role in Apple v. Qualcomm: Count XXIII of Apple’s antitrust complaint against Qualcomm is a request for judicial “declaration of unenforceability [of Qualcomm’s patents in certain contexts] due to exhaustion.””
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: More good news for Apple!
Qualcomm’s FRAND abuse must not stand. Qualcomm’s licensing scam — charging a percentage of the total cost of all components in the phone, even non-Qualcomm components — is unreasonable, illogical, and irrational.
Desperate Qualcomm seeks injunction against Apple’s suppliers – May 25, 2017