UK Consumer Watchdog Sues Qualcomm for Allegedly Breaching Competition Law

Around 29 million Britons who own an Apple or Samsung phone could be entitled to a collective £480m payout if a landmark legal claim against U.S. chipmaker Qualcomm is successful.

qualcomm iphone 7
Consumer watchdog Which? is suing the chipmaker for allegedly breaching U.K. competition law by taking advantage of its dominance in the patent licensing and chip markets.

As reported by the BBC, Which? alleges that Qualcomm charged Apple and Samsung inflated fees that were then passed on to consumers in the form of higher smartphone prices.

Which? is seeking up to £30 each in damages for about 29 million people in the U.K. who own Apple or Samsung smartphones that have been purchased since October 1, 2015. For Apple smartphone owners, that would include iPhone 6s and 6s Plus and newer devices. The watchdog has filed its legal claim with the Competition Appeal Tribunal, which will ultimately decide if it can go ahead.

"We believe Qualcomm's practices are anti-competitive and have so far taken around £480m from consumers' pockets," said Anabel Hoult, CEO of Which? "This needs to stop. We are sending a clear warning that if companies like Qualcomm indulge in manipulative practices which harm consumers, Which? is prepared to take action."

Responding to the case, Qualcomm said it had "no basis."

"As the plaintiffs are well aware, their claims were effectively put to rest last summer by a unanimous panel of judges at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States," a spokesman told the BBC.

This is by no means the first time that Qualcomm has been accused of anticompetitive behavior. In 2018, Qualcomm was hit with a 997 million euro ($1.2 billion) fine by EU antitrust regulators for paying Apple to use its LTE chips in iOS devices.

According to the European Commission's investigation, the payments to Apple occurred from 2011 to 2016, and were made with the sole aim of blocking Qualcomm's LTE chipset market rivals, such as Intel.

In 2019, an antitrust lawsuit, brought against Qualcomm by the Federal Trade Commission, concluded that Qualcomm's "no license, no chips" model that allowed it to refuse to provide chips to companies without a patent license, violated federal antitrust laws, and required Qualcomm to renegotiate all of its licensing terms with customers in good faith.

However, in August 2020, Qualcomm won an appeal that prevented the San Diego company from having to renegotiate its licensing agreements with smartphone makers.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

15 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 26.2

Friday December 5, 2025 9:40 am PST by
Apple is about to release iOS 26.2, the second major point update for iPhones since iOS 26 was rolled out in September, and there are at least 15 notable changes and improvements worth checking out. We've rounded them up below. Apple is expected to roll out iOS 26.2 to compatible devices sometime between December 8 and December 16. When the update drops, you can check Apple's servers for the ...
ios 18 to ios 26 upgrade

Apple Pushes iPhone Users Still on iOS 18 to Upgrade to iOS 26

Tuesday December 2, 2025 11:09 am PST by
Apple is encouraging iPhone users who are still running iOS 18 to upgrade to iOS 26 by making the iOS 26 software upgrade option more prominent. Since iOS 26 launched in September, it has been displayed as an optional upgrade at the bottom of the Software Update interface in the Settings app. iOS 18 has been the default operating system option, and users running iOS 18 have seen iOS 18...
iOS 26

Apple Seeds iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 Release Candidates to Developers and Public Beta Testers

Wednesday December 3, 2025 10:33 am PST by
Apple today seeded the release candidate versions of upcoming iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 updates to developers and public beta testers, with the software coming two weeks after Apple seeded the third betas. The release candidates represent the final versions of iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 that will be provided to the public if no further bugs are found during this final week of testing....
Photos App Icon Liquid Glass

John Gruber Shares Scathing Commentary About Apple's Departing Software Design Chief

Thursday December 4, 2025 9:30 am PST by
In a statement shared with Bloomberg on Wednesday, Apple confirmed that its software design chief Alan Dye will be leaving. Apple said Dye will be succeeded by Stephen Lemay, who has been a software designer at the company since 1999. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that Dye will lead a new creative studio within the company's AR/VR division Reality Labs. On his blog Daring Fireball,...
iOS 26

When Will Apple Release iOS 26.2?

Monday December 1, 2025 4:37 pm PST by
We're getting closer to the launch of the final major iOS update of the year, with Apple set to release iOS 26.2 in December. We've had three betas so far and are expecting a fourth beta or a release candidate this week, so a launch could follow as soon as next week. Past Launch Dates Apple's past iOS x.2 updates from the last few years have all happened right around the middle of the...
maxresdefault

iPhone Fold: Launch, Pricing, and What to Expect From Apple's Foldable

Monday December 1, 2025 3:00 am PST by
Apple is expected to launch a new foldable iPhone next year, based on multiple rumors and credible sources. The long-awaited device has been rumored for years now, but signs increasingly suggest that 2026 could indeed be the year that Apple releases its first foldable device. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Below, we've collated an updated set of key details that ...
Intel Inside iPhone Feature

Apple's Return to Intel Rumored to Extend to iPhone

Friday December 5, 2025 10:08 am PST by
Intel is expected to begin supplying some Mac and iPad chips in a few years, and the latest rumor claims the partnership might extend to the iPhone. In a research note with investment firm GF Securities this week, obtained by MacRumors, analyst Jeff Pu said he and his colleagues "now expect" Intel to reach a supply deal with Apple for at least some non-pro iPhone chips starting in 2028....
ive and altman

Jony Ive's OpenAI Device Barred From Using 'io' Name

Friday December 5, 2025 6:22 am PST by
A U.S. appeals court has upheld a temporary restraining order that prevents OpenAI and Jony Ive's new hardware venture from using the name "io" for products similar to those planned by AI audio startup iyO, Bloomberg Law reports. iyO sued OpenAI earlier this year after the latter announced its partnership with Ive's new firm, arguing that OpenAI's planned "io" branding was too close to its...
iphone air camera

iPhone Air's Resale Value Has Dropped Dramatically, Data Shows

Thursday December 4, 2025 5:27 am PST by
The iPhone Air has recorded the steepest early resale value drop of any iPhone model in years, with new data showing that several configurations have lost almost 50% of their value within ten weeks of launch. According to a ten-week analysis published by SellCell, Apple's latest lineup is showing a pronounced split in resale performance between the iPhone 17 models and the iPhone Air....
iPhone 17 Pro Cosmic Orange

iPhone 17 Pro Lost a Camera Feature Pro Models Have Had Since 2020

Thursday December 4, 2025 5:18 am PST by
iPhone 17 Pro models, it turns out, can't take photos in Night mode when Portrait mode is selected in the Camera app – a capability that's been available on Apple's Pro devices since the iPhone 12 Pro in 2020. If you're an iPhone 17 Pro or iPhone 17 Pro Max owner, try it for yourself: Open the Camera app with Photo selected in the carousel, then cover the rear lenses with your hand to...

Top Rated Comments

Quu Avatar
62 months ago
This is the same behaviour Intel engaged in during the early to late 2000's where they were paying Dell, HP and others to not use AMD processors in their computers. Qualcomm paid Apple rebates to not use Intel modems.

Intel lost that case, Qualcomm should similarly lose this one by using that earlier case as precedent.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Radeon85 Avatar
62 months ago
So do we get multiple payouts if we bought devices every year since 2015?, bet we don't.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
techwhiz Avatar
62 months ago

Can’t blame apple (or any other company) for wanting to mitigate the fees based on selling price for the same chip.
Here is the fee schedule link: https://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/files/qualcomm-5g-nr-royalty-terms-statement.pdf

* An effective running royalty rate of 2.275% of the selling price of branded single-mode 5G handsets; and
* An effective running royalty rate of 3.25% of the selling price of branded multi-mode (3G/4G/5G) handsets.

They charge different rates on the features and modes of the device.
It's not secret and you have a choice. The choice is don't use their technology.
They sell chips and the license is separate from the cost of the device.
So it's two parts; cost of chip and cost license (device).
Since I work in the chip industry it makes perfect sense to me. The cost of manufacturing the silicon is one cost.
The cost of the license is another.
People will say it's "double dipping".
Okay so they raise the cost of the device and everyone pays the higher price. (Apple and everyone pays one price).
They then charge a license of others just using the patents.
They make the same money, if not more, and the emerging country suffers because the cost of the low end handset just went up.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ksec Avatar
62 months ago

This is the same behaviour Intel engaged in during the early to late 2000's where they were paying Dell, HP and others to not use AMD processors in their computers. Qualcomm paid Apple rebates to not use Intel modems.

Intel lost that case, Qualcomm should similarly lose this one by using that earlier case as precedent.
That is absolutely false. People will need to understand one thing.

Your Love of Apple, or any entity replacing Apple, does not automatically made that entity's rival or enemy evil. So please stop making these claims.

First, Intel *did* pay the major vendors not to use AMD. Or to be more precise Intel will stop the rebate to vendor if they were selling AMD. Either way this was ruled as anticompetitive and illegal.

Second Qualcomm did *not* force Apple to buy their chip. Qualcomm did however force Apple not sell a WiMAX iPhone. ( WiMax being very similar to TD-LTE that is currently deployed and used by Sprint in the US ). Again *force* may not be the correct term. Qualcomm will refuse to sell you a Modem if you sell a WiMax iPhone. This isn't strictly illegal, since you can still buy 3G/4G Modem from others.

It is not clear right now what the claims the consumer watchdog are suing Qualcomm in UK. But the idea of No License No Chips has stood the test of court. Again, no one force you to buy Qualcomm Modem, you can make one yourself which is what Samsung, Huawei are doing. As well as Mediatek selling SoC with Modem, all three combined representing 50%+ of Worldwide market and *increasing*. Should Apple make their own Modem, along with possibly BBK buying or licensing Modem IP from Huawei, You are looking at Qualcomm having less than 30% of the Modem / SoC Market to play with. Hardly a monopoly by anyone's or any court's definition.

One could argue whether Qualcomm's patent licensing fee are too expensive and not FRAND. That is up for debate, the Apple's PR speak of Qualcomm's patent fee charging more than Double of the next 6 companies combined have been shown in court as a spin ( I would even call it a lie ) rather than absolute truth. So should you decide to argue for that my suggestion is that one should be well versed in the situation or ask questions instead of jumping to conclusion. That is of course, unless you are an Apple apologist.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
techwhiz Avatar
62 months ago

Qualcomm should focus on making the best CPU's, then they wouldn't have to charge others for not using them. But, it was strange that Qualcomm can charge phone makers for patents, when the phone maker is not using any Qualcomm chips, like they did with Apple.
When Intel made modems Apple paid the licensing fee that is required when the technology is put into a phone.
Intel used patents from Qualcomm to develop the modem.
The licensing fees are based on handset price.
The handset price and features are used as the basis for the license so expensive phones (Samsung, Apple, etc.) subsidize technology for emerging markets.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Nuno Lopes Avatar
62 months ago
This is similar to what Apple does in the App Store while not collecting 30% of the sale but much much less. Heck Apple accepted the payments. I wonder why Qualcomm had to pay to secure Apple has a client in the first place ... right I remember Apple suing Qualcomm before ... ehehehehe. I wonder if Google is next, by paying Apple billions to be the default search engine ... hence keeping competition out.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)