New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple is 'Not in Talks' to Settle Legal Dispute With Qualcomm and is 'Gearing Up For Trial'

Apple and Qualcomm are not in talks "at any level" to settle a wide-ranging legal dispute spanning multiple countries, according to Reuters.


The report cites an unnamed source on Apple's side who said "there is absolutely no meaningful discussion taking place between us and Qualcomm, and there is no settlement in sight," with Apple "gearing up for trial."

The case is set to go to trial early next year, should the companies fail to reach a resolution, according to the report.

Qualcomm CEO Steve Mollenkopf had told investors on the company's quarterly earnings call in July that the two companies were in talks to resolve the litigation. "We hope that through the combination of either those paths, we could get to a resolution, and we're confident that we will," he said at the time.

The saga began when Apple sued Qualcomm in January 2017 for allegedly withholding nearly $1 billion in royalty rebates as retaliation for Apple "responding truthfully to law enforcement agencies investigating them," referring to the FTC's investigation into Qualcomm's anticompetitive business practices.

Qualcomm countersued Apple in April 2017, accusing the company of failing to engage in good faith negotiations for a license to its 3G and 4G standard essential patents on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms. Qualcomm also accused Apple of encouraging regulatory attacks on its business in multiple countries.

Qualcomm's countersuit said Apple "could not have built the incredible iPhone franchise" without relying upon the chipmaker's "fundamental cellular technologies." Qualcomm went as far as alleging that Apple "contributed virtually nothing to the development of core cellular technology."

Qualcomm also accused Apple of making "misleading statements" about the performance of Qualcomm and Intel modems in iPhones. In testing, iPhone 7 models with Qualcomm's modem achieved faster wireless speeds than those with Intel's modem, but Apple said there was "no discernible difference" between the two.

Apple broadened its lawsuit against Qualcomm in June 2017, accusing the chipmaker of "double-dipping" with unfair patent licensing agreements. Apple said Qualcomm charged it royalties based on a percentage of the entire iPhone's value, despite supplying just a single component of the device - the wireless modem.

The legal dispute encompasses several other claims, including Qualcomm's allegation that Apple shared Qualcomm's trade secrets with Intel to help improve its LTE modems, allowing Apple to stop using Qualcomm's modems.

Qualcomm was the exclusive supplier of wireless modems in iPhones until the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus, when Apple added Intel as a secondary supplier. Likely due to this legal dispute, Intel became the exclusive supplier of wireless modems starting with the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR.

Apple is reportedly $7 billion behind in royalties owed to Qualcomm as it withholds payments as a result of the legal dispute.



Top Rated Comments

(View all)

1 week ago

No, I want to know why YOU think they can just steamroll through the tech industry and buy everyone out.


1) they have the money to
2) the USA a free country where free commerce is allowed (you live in china or something?)
3) everything is for sale if the price is right - that's just the facts of life buddy
4) its not "steamrolling" if its a mutual agreement
5) I want to know why you are so hostile to the idea of apple buying other companies???
Rating: 21 Votes
1 week ago

Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.

They are a monopoly of their own products just like Microsoft is a monopoly of Surface products, Google has a monopoly on Pixel laptops and Samsung has a monopoly on Galaxy phones. That is not a monopoly that harms consumers since healthy competition exists outside of iPhone and Mac products.
Rating: 12 Votes
1 week ago
And then there's this:

U.S. court rules Qualcomm must license technology to rivals ('https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qualcomm-ftc/u-s-court-rules-qualcomm-must-license-technology-to-rivals-idUSKCN1NB2KP')


Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.




Since when?:confused:
Rating: 11 Votes
1 week ago

Apple is not entitled to just buy any company you think it should.

Why do you think this way?


Apple is absolutely entitled to buy any company they want if the company is willing to sell.
Rating: 11 Votes
1 week ago

Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.


If your understanding of monopoly is "get $200 when you pass Go", I can see how you'd come to that conclusion.
Rating: 9 Votes
1 week ago

Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.


Apple is far from a monopoly, there are dozens if not hundreds of pc and phone manufacturers out there for you to choose from - you could be using a windows PC and an android phone. But I see in your signature you are using a "Hackintosh"... you know why its called "Hackintosh"? cause when you run that, you are allowing hackers easy access into your icloud account...

I guess you don't realize that when you buy apple hardware with their software, what you are paying for is the most secure, hacker resistant ecosystem on the planet. They even deny governments' ability to access your devices. But hey, you may not care about those things so you should probably switch to windows and android.
Rating: 7 Votes
1 week ago

Because Apple already is a monopoly, it doesn't need to be even more so.


You might want to study up on what a monopoly is.
Rating: 7 Votes
1 week ago
Is there any deal in which Apple hasn't let it go sour? Jesus.. Samsung spat took years to finish... How long is this one going to last?
[doublepost=1541604196][/doublepost]

Apple should just buy Qualcomm already and be done with it...


Apple is not entitled to just buy any company you think it should.

Why do you think this way?
Rating: 6 Votes
1 week ago

Seems to me, of the two feuding children, that Qualcomm kind of “started” it, with their initial withholding of $1 Billion in Royalty rebates.


Qualcomm withheld the kickbacks partly because Apple violated their contract by giving false evidence. (Apple should not complain... their contracts with their suppliers are even worse.)

E.g. Apple told the Korean FTC that they were unable to buy modems from other makers. Poor, poor Apple. Then about six weeks later, the new iPhones came out using Intel modems. A more blatant lie would be hard to find.

I have a hard time with this. I like Qualcomm and want them to do well and stay an active part of the Tech industry.


We all do. Qualcomm invented the 3G that everyone uses/used. And they're a huge part of 4G, 5G and beyond.

Without Qualcomm spending billions of dollars a year on R&D, we wouldn't have all that. Certainly Apple isn't gonna do it.

At the same time, I see Apple’s viewpoint on not wanting to pay them a precentage of earnings per device, as opposed to a flat per device fee.


Except that's exactly how most every member of ETSI charges. Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson, Sony, LG, you name it... they all charge that way so that higher profit phones subsidize the ability for companies to sell tiny profit phones.

And without those billions of tiny profit phones, there would have been NO WORLDWIDE NETWORK for phones like Apple's to use. Apple hates it because they refuse to sell a low profit phone.

Charging by percentage is a totally legal and common way of licensing IP. Heck, even Apple licensed their own IP that way. So any argument otherwise is just nonsense. It's all about money, not right or wrong as Apple's PR would like us to think. Tim Cook sees sales slipping and he needs more profit any way he can get it.
Rating: 6 Votes
1 week ago
Another exciting episode of:



Rating: 5 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]