Qualcomm CEO sees chance of Apple settlement this year

“One of the biggest legal battles in the technology industry may be entering its final stages,” Ian King and Emily Chang report for Bloomberg. “Qualcomm Inc. Chief Executive Officer Steve Mollenkopf said a bitter standoff between the chip maker and Apple Inc. is entering a period when both sides have an increasing incentive to settle.”

“In coming months, the companies will be forced to make their case in front of jurors and judges in the U.S., China, Germany and other jurisdictions. Agreements often materialize before such expensive and public steps,” King and Chang report. “‘The environment is such that a deal could get done,’ said Mollenkopf in an interview on Bloomberg TV’s ‘Studio 1.0,’ which airs Sept. 26. ‘Traditionally, legal milestones create an environment for both parties to change their perspective.'”

“The dispute has been raging in public for almost two years, pitting the world’s most valuable public company against the largest supplier of mobile chips. Apple’s suit accused Qualcomm of unfairly using its lead in phone modems to force customers to pay inflated licensing fees,” King and Chang report. “If Qualcomm continues to improve its chips at a greater rate than rivals, there’s no reason why Apple and Qualcomm wouldn’t work together again — after resolving their legal fracas, he said.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: The dance continues.

Qualcomm’s unreasonable, illogical, and irrational licensing scam, which charges a percentage of the total cost of all components in the phone, even non-Qualcomm components, must end.

SEE ALSO:
Qualcomm makes a tactical error in its battle with Apple – September 7, 2018

5 Comments

  1. “‘Traditionally, legal milestones create an environment for both parties to change their perspective.” — CEO Qualcomm.

    Hmmm… wasn’t this case brought because the US Supreme Court set a legal milestone about double-dipping being illegal in another tech case? So, is Qualcomm finally changing their perspective?

    1. Yes, part of it was related to another case (was it against Lexmark? I can’t remember), that made it illegal to double-dip on royalties, as Qualcomm charges the chip manufacturer the royalty, and then again when someone buys those chips and incorporates it into a product. A separate issue is FRAND pricing on SEP (Standard Essential), where they are required to license SEPs at a reasonable rate, which they obviously do not do. So, assuming the courts are rational, Qualcomm is going to have to change its business plan, because they’ll no longer be able to get money beyond the value of their product.

Leave a Reply to peterblood71 Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.