ITC Recommends that Apple be Ruled Guilty of Infringing Qualcomm Patents

[Carclis]

Just another episode in the Apple vs Qualcomm saga where Apple has been found to be infringing on Qualcomm patents, according to the ITC. The complaint was filed by Qualcomm nearly 12 months ago now and seeks to restrict the ability for Apple to import goods that infringe on Qualcomm patents.

 

Article:

Quote

Attorneys representing the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) have issued statements supportive of Qualcomm’s claims regarding Apple’s alleged patent infringement, according to a report from Reuters. It is important to note that this trial is just getting started, however. The ITC attorneys are only acting as advisers and the judge overseeing the trial is not required to follow the ITC’s advice. That being said, judges do take the ITC’s opinions’ seriously, so this is a blow to Apple’s case.

Quote

As a result of Apple’s decision to stop paying all royalties as both companies wait to hear the outcomes of their respective lawsuits, Qualcomm has slashed its profit forecasts. On April 28, 2017, Reuters reported that Qualcomm would not receive any royalties from Apple’s contract manufacturers for sales that took place in the first quarter of 2017.

Apple:

Quote

Apple has refuted these claims, with a spokesman noting: “In our many years of ongoing negotiations with Qualcomm, these patents have never been discussed.

Quote

Apple alleged that at least some of the patents Qualcomm wants to get paid for are invalid, and that the chipmaker hasn’t fulfilled its obligation to charge fair and reasonable rates. The iPhone maker pointed to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in May that limited the ability of patent owners to control the use of their products after they’re sold. Qualcomm, Apple said, is illegally double dipping by selling the chips it makes and also licensing its technology.

Qualcomm:

Quote

Qualcomm says its practices are legal and were accepted by customers for many years as the smartphone industry boomed, but it has made some changes to its licensing model of taking a cut of the selling price of a device in a bid to ease tensions with customers and regulators.

Quote

“Apple employs technologies invented by Qualcomm without paying for them,” noting that the iPhone’s power management and Force Touch features are just “a few examples of the many Qualcomm technologies that Apple uses to improve its devices and increase its profits.”

The ITC recommendation is not the final word in this case, however it has a strong influence on the case outcome and a final decision is expected by January.

 

My thoughts are that Apple has little ground to stand on when their own actions have resulted in the monopolisation of repair business of their products across the world. If they infringe on the patents of others they should expect the same recourse as that which they subject other individuals and companies to.
Source 1
Source 2

[Sauron]

[Skiiwee29]

You state apple was found to be violating, but your quotes and notes indicate a judge will be ruling on it in January... I fail to see where it says they were found to be violating the patents? (Not an apple fan boy as I personally hate iPhones, just pointing out holes in the name and information)

[ItsMitch]

Verrry misleading title. 

POSSIBLE BAN

Not a actual ban. 

Quote

 

(Reuters) - The staff of the U.S. International Trade Commission on Friday recommended that a trade judge find that Apple Inc (AAPL.O) infringed at least one of Qualcomm Inc’s (QCOM.O) patents, a move that could lead to blocking the import of some iPhones.

 

They're only recommending the judge, and their word is not legally binding at all. 

[Carclis]

3 minutes ago, Skiiwee29 said:

You state apple was found to be violating, but your quotes and notes indicate a judge will be ruling on it in January... I fail to see where it says they were found to be violating the patents? (Not an apple fan boy as I personally hate iPhones, just pointing out holes in the name and information)

Thanks, I changed the title to reflect this. Its more so the ITC recommending that the judge rule against Apple.

[captain_to_fire]

I think the only reason that Apple and other OEMs like Samsung are still using Qualcomm made modems is because of CDMA compatibility which I think at the moment only the US and possibly a few others still maintaining an antiquated radio system like CDMA. In 2017, Apple dual sourced their modems for the iPhone 7 and it turns out the iPhones with Qualcomm modems (A1660, A1661) perform better than the ones with Intel modems (A1778, A1784).

 

 

[ItsMitch]

Just now, VegetableStu said:

M8 HOW U SS YOUR MAU5 O_O

don't you shout at me, i'm telling my mum

[Sauron]

10 minutes ago, captain_to_fire said:

I think the only reason that Apple and other OEMs like Samsung are still using Qualcomm made modems is because of CDMA compatibility which I think at the moment only the US and possibly a few others still maintaining an antiquated radio system like CDMA. 

Yeah - but also patents, as showcased here.

[Guest]

Can't believe Qualcomm would knowingly make patents that Apple might infringe on in the future, all about money with these companies smh. 

[Carclis]

9 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Can't believe Qualcomm would knowingly make patents that Apple might infringe on in the future, all about money with these companies smh. 

I'm not sure if the "/s" is implied here but patents are there to recognise inventions by companies so as to incentivise innovation by awarding innovators with royalties. While I don't like them either due to them often even stifling innovation or competition, there isn't really a better alternative currently.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Carclis said:

I'm not sure if the "/s" is implied here but patents are there to recognise inventions by companies so as to incentivise innovation by awarding innovators with royalties. While I don't like them either due to them often even stifling innovation or competition, there isn't really a better alternative currently.

It is sarcasm don't worry. Apple have the best legal team in the business though so their response is pretty standard Apple. I wonder what design it infringes on and whether this will affect Apple's upcoming switch to ARM for MacOS. 

[Carclis]

59 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

It is sarcasm don't worry. Apple have the best legal team in the business though so their response is pretty standard Apple. I wonder what design it infringes on and whether this will affect Apple's upcoming switch to ARM for MacOS. 

I could be wrong here but I believe it's the 4G LTE standard which Qualcomm were responsible for establishing. Seeing as Apple is sourcing from Intel as well, they would need to pay the royalties on those. It seems like Apples main argument is that they're discriminated against because they price their phones high, despite others such as Google and Samsung making similar moves.

Quote

Following news that Qualcomm had been charging heightened royalties for use of its tech, as well as reports indicating Qualcomm required Apple to pay a percentage of the iPhone’s revenue in return for the use of Qualcomm patents, Apple has sued the company in three countries.

It makes sense though since the higher price will result in lower volumes being sold and would have hurt Qualcomm in the long run.