1.Qualcomm made three patents to authorize concessions, only to regain the hearts of Apple and Huawei. 2. Wang Hong-Toshishi’s infringement was rejected in the United States. 3. Misfortunes do not exist! Apple has suffered two consecutive patent infringement lawsuits. Tesla Semi Truck was sued by 'Nicholas Motor' Patent Claim: Claiming $2 Billion; 5. Nintendo was accused of infringing on patent counterparty's demand for the sale of Switch handles nationwide;
According to the micro-messaging news, since the beginning of 2017, Qualcomm and Apple Inc. have been caught in an intensified legal battle. Because of the status of the two companies in the industry, this patent battle has received special attention. It is worth noting that this patent is The war seems to be turning into a turning point with Qualcomm’s concessions. According to Reuters, Qualcomm has made three concessions a few days ago, hoping to resolve its patent dispute with Apple.
First, in terms of patent fee acceptance, Qualcomm lowered the threshold for licensing, and smart phone manufacturers were able to choose lower-cost licensing projects, from 5% of original equipment costs to 3.25% of equipment costs.
Secondly, by opening up its 5G patents, it no longer takes the patent bundled route of the CDMA era. Mobile and tablet manufacturers do not need to pay extra fees for adopting Qualcomm's 5G communications license. This move can placate regulatory agencies and the vast number of manufacturers. Qualcomm said that it hopes that Without increasing the price, provide more technical and patented products to create a good foundation for the future stable market. They call their own company's 5G licensing policy as 'regulator-friendly' license.
Finally, Qualcomm is considering gradually discarding the consistent practice of charging a percentage of equipment costs, which will benefit high-end mobile phones such as the Apple iPhone.
In addition, Qualcomm announced last week that it will adjust its core business patent licensing fees by setting a limit of US$400, which is a one-fifth reduction from the previous US$500 limit, in order to activate the development of authorized businesses.
But so far Apple has not responded to this.
Qualcomm dropped Apple patent fees for major customers?
Market analysts analyzed that Qualcomm’s practice was based on its major customer, Apple. In early 2017, Apple filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Qualcomm, accusing Qualcomm of receiving unfair royalties for 'unrelated technology'. Apple insists that Qualcomm's standard pricing for mobile phones is unfair, but Qualcomm responded that their technology is 'the core of every iPhone'. Qualcomm subsequently filed a counterclaim, accusing Apple of violating the license agreement and making a false statement. .
It is precisely because of this unfinished patent wars that it is reported that Apple will abandon the use of Qualcomm's baseband chips and use competitors' Intel products as the main supplier of the iPhone. This will create a camp for Qualcomm. Serious impact on the revenue.
Recently, Qualcomm announced its second-quarter earnings report in 2018. Technology-authorized revenues fell 44% from the same period in 2017 and also fell 3% from the first quarter of 2018. The main reason was that the past three quarters have not come from Apple. Any income that results in a 40% drop in operating income.
Qualcomm and Huawei are also negotiating patents
It is worth mentioning that, in addition to the patent dispute with Apple, in March 2018, the Wall Street Journal cited sources who reported that Qualcomm is negotiating with Huawei to try to resolve the patent dispute. In November last year, Qualcomm held a meeting with shareholders. It was revealed that in addition to Apple, there was also a mainland mobile phone brand maker that refused to pay royalties. According to Taiwan media quoted supply chain sources, the mainland company is Huawei.
Huawei is the second company to refuse to pay royalties to Qualcomm. Before, the world’s top four Apple OEM manufacturers – Foxconn’s parent companies, Hon Hai Precision, Wistron, Compal and Hewlett-Packard—according to Apple’s Intent, refused to pay royalties to Qualcomm and brought the company to court. These OEMs have been paying until 2016.
It is reported that Huawei's annual shipments of smart phones are approximately 150 million. Although the average unit price of Huawei mobile phones is relatively low, about US$300, Huawei pays Qualcomm’s patent fees annually and accounts for approximately 5 to 10% of Qualcomm’s royalties. , Plus Huawei owns its own baseband technology, and many other related patents, and decided to suspend payment of Qualcomm royalties.
It is reported that although the negotiation between Qualcomm and Huawei has progressed smoothly, it does not rule out the possibility of a breakdown of the negotiations, nor does it guarantee that the parties will reach an agreement. (Proofreading/Fan Rong)
2. Wang Hong Toshiba’s infringement was rejected in the initial judgment in the United States;
Non-volatile memory plant Wang Hong (2337) sued the Toshiba infringement case in the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) and recently released preliminary results. Although it was partially infringed, it did not meet the requirements of the “domestic industry” of the United States. Therefore, a patent-related lawyer stated that Wang Hong stipulated that the importation of Toshiba products should be rejected in the initial judgment.
The above case is not expected to announce final judgment until August. Wang Hong responded to the case and the company will continue to defend the company's rights and interests to curb unlawful infringement.
It is understood that Wanghong is based on three patents No. 360, No. 417 and No. 602. According to Article 337 of the U.S. Tariff Act, it infringed Toshiba at ITC and hoped to ban the import of related products into the United States.
According to the information released by ITC, it was determined that Toshiba did not infringe on the patents of Wanghong 360 and 417, but it was found that some Toshiba products infringed the claims of Nos. 1 to 10 of its patent No. 602, but also determined that Nos. 1 to 5 and No. 7 Up to 10 patent claims are invalid, which means that Wang Hong seems to have a chance of winning in the 6th claim.
However, the most important key to the whole case is that ITC believes that Wang Hong’s proposal this time does not meet the "domestic industry" requirements of Section 337 investigation, that is, there must be existing or emerging patent-related protection industries in the United States. Therefore, if ITC's final judgment fails to make a comeback, Wanghong hopes to ban the import of Toshiba-related products will not be able to do so.
The ITC investigated the three major conditions for the establishment of the case, including the import of the product into the United States, the infringement of the patent right, and the domestic industry. The relevant industry patentees believe that what Wanghong can hope for is the reverse of the ITC final decision, and it can also have Part of the infringement concerns will be played separately in the litigation of the local court, or both parties are willing to sit on the negotiating table to negotiate reconciliation.
Patent attorneys said that in the future, the focus of Wang Hong and Toshiba’s offensive and defensive actions in the courtroom may become Wang Hong 602 patents Nos. 1 to 10, particularly whether the 6th item is valid and whether it is infringed.
Wanghong is a Taiwanese factory with strong patent strength. International patent research agency LexInnova pointed out that Wanghong’s global patent strength rating in 3D memory ranks fourth in 95 countries and 44 in Toshiba. In addition, Wanghong is important in international Semiannual academic conferences, including IEDM and other published forward-looking technical papers have also received attention. Last year, the company had 4 papers selected for IEDM, and one of the 3D NAND-related papers was selected by the conference as a “highlight paper”.
3. Misfortunes are not alone! Apple has encountered two consecutive patent infringement lawsuits;
Micro-message news, Apple recently suffered two patent infringement lawsuits. The first patent litigation related to dual cameras. An Israeli company named Corephotonics sued two-lens cameras including the iPhone X for infringement of its dual-lens cameras. Patent related to the 'Micro Telephoto Lens Assembly' held; and another patent litigation related to Apple’s 'Driving Do Not Disturb Mode', a company called Allied Signal accused the Apple Mobile’s “Do Not Disturb Mode” of infringement of the company 4 patents.
According to foreign media reports, Apple Inc. was recently sued by an Israeli company called Corephotonics in the federal district court of northern California. Corephotonics accused Apple of infringing its patent on its 'mini telephoto lens assembly'. The infringing products include the iPhone. 7 Plus, iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X - they are all equipped with dual cameras.
Corephotonics asked Apple to compensate for economic losses, stop the infringement immediately, and bear the costs of litigation.
In fact, in November 2017, Corephotonics Inc. sued the iPhone 7 Plus's dual-lens camera for infringement of its four patents. In recent days, Corephotonics again filed suit against the iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X dual-camera phones, and The lawsuit mentioned four patents that accused Apple of infringement in November last year.
Corephotonics believes that Apple did not use the patent license of the company, but still insisted on the use of Corephotonics's technology patents, which seriously violated the legitimate rights and interests of Corephotonics and should extract license fees from the sales of the iPhone.
According to data, the patent is a dual-aperture camera technology for the production of miniature telephoto lenses, which was awarded to Corephotonics in January of this year. This technology can not only provide the imaging quality and sensitivity required by smartphone users, but also can With the use of two cameras on the back of the phone and related algorithms, the digital and optical zoom technology is comprehensively utilized to provide greater magnification for smartphones while not degrading the imaging quality.
According to sources, Apple was very interested in the technology as early as 2012 and negotiated with Corephotonics in Tel Aviv in June 2014. The purpose was to obtain permission to use this technology. Apple asked Corephotonics to provide prototype products for it. Verification. However, the two companies did not reach an agreement in the end. Two years later, the two parties resumed negotiations. However, no patent licensing agreement has been reached.
Apple's 'Do Not Disturb Mode' is also accused of infringement
It is reported that these patents constitute a system. When the speed of the mobile phone reaches the speed of the moving car, the system will be turned on. After the opening, the system will block incoming information. Unless the calling party is the user's 'contact' or the same phone is Two calls within a short interval, this feature will block incoming calls.
Allied Signal Company requires Apple to compensate for economic losses, lawyers and prosecution fees.
It is worth mentioning that in 2015, Allied Signal sued AT&T with three of the four appeals, but withdrew it shortly afterwards.
4. Tesla semi truck was sued by 'Nicholas Motors': claiming 2 billion U.S. dollars;
IT House May 2 news that Tesla Semi Electric Trucks infringed their patents. A few days ago, a car company named Nikola Motor Company sued Tesla for a compensation of US$2 billion. Nikola Motor Company is a Utah company State-owned Nissan Electric Vehicles (Nicholas Motors), in a suing document, said that Tesla had copied his patent while developing an electric truck. Nikola said that the Tesla Semi electric truck has many similarities with its own truck. Such as wraparound windshields, streamlined body and so on.
In response, Tesla's press spokesman responded that such a lawsuit did not make any sense at all, and said that the matter had already been referred to the court and was ready for litigation.
Nikola sent Tesla a letter to stop infringement before Tesla showed electric semi-trailers in November last year, but Tesla did not respond.
Nicholas Motors owns two products: the practical electric four-wheel drive 'Nicola Zero' and the electric traction truck head 'Nikola One'. The latter uses an EV electric power system and has a powerful 320 kWh large battery pack. , It is said that it has cruising range of 1200 miles (1931 kilometers) after it was full.
5. Nintendo is accused of patent infringement. The other party demands that the Switch handle be banned from sale in the United States;
IT House May 2 News US company Gamevice recently sued Nintendo Switch for infringement, the US International Trade Commission (ITC) announced that they will accept Gamesvice submitted complaints to Nintendo's specific game console system with a removable handheld controller ' Launch an investigation.
Gamevice provides additional handle products for iPhone, iPad and Android, but the principle is not exactly the same as that of the Switch handle, including additional features such as infrared sensors, and the handle can still be used after being removed from the Switch. The only similarity is that Where the controller is connected by sliding it from the top of both sides of the device.