3 ms·
A patent holder can charge whatever they want, or even refuse to allow anyone to license it. The difference is that Qualcomm agreed to FRAND (fair, reasonable,
by rgbrenner 9y ago
A patent holder can charge whatever they want, or even refuse to allow anyone to license it.
The difference is that Qualcomm agreed to FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) licensing terms in exchange for their patent being included in the standard.
Once they got their patent in the standard, now they're saying they get to charge whatever they want.
That's the problem. That wasn't the deal they and everyone else agreed to, and it's too late to remove their patent from the standard.
- atka 9y agoThere is nothing in FRAND that says what they can charge. They can charge whatever they want as long as it is fair reasonable and non discrimatory.
- robhu 9y agoIsn't the point that the R of FRAND is being violated because it is not reasonable to charge a % of the cost of the entire device when they are contributing only the modem.
- tooltalk 9y agono, a patent holder CAN NOT charge whatever they want. Apple tried it during their quest to destroy Android (Samsung) a few years back, but most of their utility claims were "apportioned" accordingly. Apple was able to gorge the entire profit on per device on a couple of frivolous design patents, but the SCOTUS stepped in to reverse that absurd ruling last year. Contrary to your unsubstantiated claims, Qualcomm's licensing rates are publicly available and published time to time -- often in the range of 3% to 5%. Apple according to this article pays nowhere close to the published rate that most other handset makers are paying.