In the United States, the hearings held in the three most important markets of China and Germany will soon determine that Apple has forced one of the world’s largest chip makers to change its mode of operation, thereby saving itself billions of dollars in technology licensing fees. Based on the calculation of patent fees for each mobile phone that Apple sells, Apple may default on Qualcomm’s unpaid fees of between US$2.5 billion and US$4.5 billion, which may be equivalent to one-fifth of Qualcomm’s annual revenue.
Apple argued that Qualcomm had used its patent ownership (covering the basic principles of modern smartphone communications) to obtain unfair high returns and forced Apple to buy its chips. Qualcomm countered that Apple is stealing its assets and refused to be the rest of the industry. The company cherishes and pays for the technology to pay for the use of its technology. Will Stofega, a mobile industry analyst at market research firm IDC, said: 'Trying to sort out the complicated litigation relationship between the two companies is a Difficult task. '
The legal team of Apple and Qualcomm has always been very busy. This trend is likely to continue this way. Matt Larson, intelligence analyst at Bloomberg, said that in 16 jurisdictions in 6 different countries, Apple Qualcomm has more than 50 independent intellectual property and antitrust litigations. Larsson wrote in a recent research report that although there is no single case that can solve all problems, some decisions in the second half of 2018 may be Reconciliation motivation.
Next week, Washington's International Trade Commission (ITC) will begin a hearing on Qualcomm v. Apple’s infringement of its three patents. Qualcomm demanded that the agency ban imports of all iPhone 7 phones without Qualcomm chips. Most of the iPhones that were collected were actually produced in Asia.
Similarly, a court in Mannheim, Germany, is trying Qualcomm v. Apple. Qualcomm believes that iPhones using Intel chips infringe Qualcomm’s patents and should be excluded from the market in Europe’s largest country. Judges Temporarily agreed with Qualcomm, but decided to set aside the case pending the European Patent Office to decide whether the relevant patent is valid.
In China’s largest smart phone market, the Chinese Patent Review Board will begin hearings this month and next month. Apple filed an application and asked for the cancellation of patents that Qualcomm is trying to use against it. Larson said that the ruling in these cases may be It will be made in the third quarter. IDC's Stoeffga said: 'China's ruling is the most important. Western Europe is also very important, but it is still unable to compare with China. They are fighting for sharing. They do not want anything to hinder their progress. . '
Qualcomm’s management insists that behind the fierce rhetoric of these legal allegations, the dispute is actually only a commercial negotiation. Once they prove their legal status, they are likely to reach a settlement and restore normal customer-supply. Business relations. Qualcomm's general counsel, Don Rosenberg, said: 'Initially, we found ourselves on the defensive. We could only respond to the misrepresentation of Apple. Everyone knows Apple, but no one Know that Qualcomm has an important position in Apple products. I believe we are in a transitional phase and the facts will be self-evident.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment, and mentioned the company’s previous statement on the conflict. Apple denied that it infringed any of Qualcomm’s patents and claimed that patents in the lawsuit should not be published. Apple said that in the face of increasing At the time of regulatory sanctions and litigation tsunami, Qualcomm submitted a petition to the International Trade Commission (ITC). Qualcomm responded by retaliating against companies that dared to challenge its deep-rooted monopoly, including Apple and Intel.
Matt Ramsay, an analyst at Cowen, said: 'Apple wants to change its position. Some government entities or courts were willing to issue a ban on the iPhone. I have a feeling that Apple's business may continue. a period of time. '
The International Trade Commission (ITC), German courts, and China are all entities that help solve patent disputes. These places are known for their speed, they hold a position that is beneficial to patent owners, and they are more likely to implement certain patents for infringing patented products. A variety of forms of sales bans. Josh Landau, patent advisor of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, said: 'The ITC case raises the level of danger faced by Apple. If the committee issues Apple products The import ban will prompt them to reach a settlement faster.'
For Qualcomm, the signs of Apple's prevailing position may aggravate the worries of investors and analysts that its lucrative licensing business is disappearing. Despite the uncertain timing and specific terms of both parties' patent disputes, the two giants are The settlement agreement is widely expected. Both companies and investors hope that the ruling will provide a roadmap for the final solution.