Qualcomm CEO Says Out of Court Settlement With Apple Could Happen

Apple and Qualcomm have been embroiled in a bitter legal battle since the beginning of the year, and though the fight has escalated in recent weeks, Qualcomm CEO Steve Mollenkopf today told Fortune that an out of court settlement is not out of the question.

"There's not really anything new going on," Mollenkopf said speaking at the Brainstorm Tech conference in Aspen. About the Apple dispute, he explained "those things tend to get to resolved out of court and there's no reason why I wouldn't expect that to be the case here."

Mollenkopf went on to say that he has no specific news of a settlement and that nothing new has happened in the case. "I don't have an announcement or anything so please don't ask, he told Fortune. Mollenkopf made a similar statement back in February, but that was before the legal battle between the two companies intensified. At that time, he also said he didn't expect a public fight, something Apple and Qualcomm have not been able to avoid.

qualcomm iphone 7
Today's interview suggests Qualcomm is still open to settlement talks, but whether that will happen remains to be seen. If Apple and Qualcomm do not settle, we can expect a legal battle that will continue on for several years.

The fight between Apple and Qualcomm started in January, after the FTC complained that Qualcomm had engaged in anticompetitive patent licensing practices. Apple sued Qualcomm for $1 billion just days later, accusing the company of charging unfair royalties for "technologies they have nothing to do with" and refusing to pay quarterly rebates.

According to Apple, Qualcomm has overcharged it by billions of dollars by "double-dipping" with unfair patent licensing agreements, while Qualcomm claims its innovations are "at the heart of every iPhone" and that the royalties are fair.

Qualcomm went on to countersue Apple in April, accusing the company of breaching licensing agreements, making false statements, and encouraging regulatory attacks against Qualcomm, which prompted Apple to stop making royalty payments to Qualcomm entirely until a court can determine the proper amount due.

Apple in late June expanded its lawsuit against Qualcomm, and at the beginning of July, Qualcomm filed a separate patent lawsuit against Apple and asked the International Trade Commission to block imports of select iPhone and iPad models.

Popular Stories

maxresdefault

No iOS 19: Apple Going Straight to iOS 26

Wednesday May 28, 2025 11:56 am PDT by
With the design overhaul that's coming this year, Apple plans to rename all of its operating systems, reports Bloomberg. Going forward, iOS, iPadOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS, and visionOS will be identified by year, rather than by version number. We're not going to be getting iOS 19, we're getting iOS 26. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. iOS 26 will be accompanied by...
iPhone 17 Pro Blue Feature Tighter Crop

iPhone 17 Pro Launching Later This Year With These 12 New Features

Tuesday May 27, 2025 9:10 am PDT by
While the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max are not expected to launch until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices. Below, we recap key changes rumored for the iPhone 17 Pro models as of May 2025: Aluminum frame: iPhone 17 Pro models are rumored to have an aluminum frame, whereas the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro models have a titanium frame, and the iPhone X ...
Generic iPhone 17 Feature With Full Width Dynamic Island

iPhone 17 Display Sizes: What to Expect

Thursday May 29, 2025 11:38 am PDT by
Apple's iPhone 17 lineup will include four iPhones, and two of those are going to get all-new display sizes. There's the iPhone 17 Air, which we've heard about several times, but the standard iPhone 17 is also going to have a different display size. We've heard a bit about the updated size before, but with most rumors focusing on the iPhone 17 Air, it's easy to forget. Display analyst Ross...
28 years later iphone 1

Filmmakers Used 20 iPhones at Once to Shoot '28 Years Later'

Friday May 30, 2025 7:27 am PDT by
Sony today provided a closer look at the iPhone rigs used to shoot the upcoming post-apocalyptic British horror movie "28 Years Later" (via IGN). With a budget of $75 million, Danny Boyle's 28 Years Later will become the first major blockbuster movie to be shot on iPhone. 28 Years Later is the sequel to "28 Days Later" (2002) and "28 Weeks Later" (2007), which depict the aftermath of a...
macOS 26 visionOS Inspired Feature

macOS 26 Rumored to Drop Support for These Five Macs

Thursday May 29, 2025 5:31 am PDT by
The next major version of macOS, now dubbed "macOS 26," is rumored to drop support for several older Intel-based Mac models currently compatible with macOS Sequoia. According to individuals familiar with the matter cited by AppleInsider, the following Macs will not be supported by the next version of macOS: MacBook Pro (2018) iMac (2019) iMac Pro (2017) Mac mini (2018) MacB...
iOS 26 Mock Rainbow Feature

With iOS 18 Jumping to iOS 26, Will Apple Renumber iPhones Too?

Thursday May 29, 2025 1:59 pm PDT by
With the next-generation version of iOS and other 2025 software updates, Apple is planning to change its numbering scheme. Rather than iOS 19, which would logically follow iOS 18, Apple is instead going to call the update iOS 26. Apple plans to use 26 across all of its platforms (the number representing the upcoming year), which will presumably be less confusing than having iOS 19, macOS 16,...

Top Rated Comments

farewelwilliams Avatar
103 months ago
pretty much means "i think im going to lose...soo just pay us to stop this thing pls"
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ILikeAllOS Avatar
103 months ago
Translation: We don't have a case so we're hoping Apple will just give us some free money so we will shut up.
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cmaier Avatar
103 months ago
I've seen a lot of patent lawsuits. Publicly saying "the case might settle" is intended to send a message: "our position feels weak. let's talk about settlement."
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
4jasontv Avatar
103 months ago
Please don't settle. Take them to court. Try and get every penny out of them... and fail. Fail so that the little guys who can't sue Qualcomm can get a reasonable price when trying to develop something beyond a pad of glass.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Apple_Robert Avatar
103 months ago
Reads like an offer to settle. Otherwise, he opened his mouth about ongoing litigation when he shouldn't have.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
LordVic Avatar
103 months ago
Erm No I think they are about right in their summary of it.

What exactly is wrong?
That Apple are accusing Qualcomm of charging them twice?
Apple is accusing, but there's no evidence of this. Apple is claiming that paying for the modem's and then paying a CDMA license is "paying twice". they're attempting to conflate two seperate QualCom products into 1 to make it look like they're double dipping. In reality, QualComm charges for the Modems (as a piece of hardware), and charges license fees to use QualComms' patents and ownership over CDMA (which they invented)

That the FTC are accusing Qualcomm of bad practises?
Conflating the FTC and Apple cases isn't good here. Bad business practices doesn't mean illegal business practices. If Apple doesn't like Qualcomm's business practices, than Apple is more than welcome to invent their own infrastructure built on their own technologies.

That Qualcomm states they should receive a % of total iPhone sale price as their tech is fundamental to how the iPhone works?
Yes. This is how any licensing works. It's just like Apple's asking for portions (based on % of total retail price) of Samsung devices that violated their patents. Or how Apple charges % of all purchases from the App store. or.. well, that's business. Apple has clearly demonstrated that QualComms CDMA technologies are required for the iPhone to exist, especially as it is today. They can either choose to keep paying, or pick a new network technology which isn't owned by someone else.

That Qualcomm therefore thinks that does not qualify as FRAND when that is what FRAND is therefore(in part)?
the Patents are already FRAND. What Apple is claiming is that they believe QualComm's existing rates are too high. Apple should be more than welcome to raise a case to have that investigated. The question remains, what does the rest of the industry say? If Apple is the ONLY company that is saying that their fees under FRAND are too high, than it's not much of an argument. the point of FRAND is so that everyone who needs access to essential technologies can get it for reasonable pricing, but that also means that all people paying the licenses pay the same percentage.

That Qualcomm is counter suing Apple in return for being sued ?
Qualcomm is counter suing because of how Apple has addressed this. Instead of filing with FRAND and waiting on the outcome, they turned around and charged QualComm over 1 billion dollars and called it a "rebate". And then they went to their manufacturing partners (FoxConn and Pegatron) and made them stop paying their license fees. Remember, APPLE HAS NOT PAID QUALCOMM directly for the license. it is FoxConn and Pegatron who pay QC the license, and then passes the fees on to Apple.

That all seems wrong doesn't it (end sarcasm).
So yes. It all seems wrong. While Apple has every right to argue for lower FRAND fees, Apple overstepped their business agreements by demanding the rebate and then having their own suppliers withold their payments. Apple has now forced FoxConn and Pegatron to violate their contractual agreements (That were in place prior to the iPhone) by witholding payment, while at the same time demanding Qualcomm pay Apple directly for any fees Apple paid to Foxconn / Pegatron.

Apple might be right that the prices are too high. But Apple has basically used their size and power to extort pressure on their manufacturers to violate their contracts and break the laws. Now Apple is essentially selling their devices, using CDMA technology invented by QualComm without paying.
[doublepost=1500398424][/doublepost]
Why would he talk about settlement when the matter is still on-going? Smelling defeat?
or an Olive branch to avoid years of stupidly expensive litigation.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)