maybe the reason the narrative doesn't make sense is because it doesn't.. Qualcomm never had opportunity to counter Apple's claim before -- and I'm fairly sure

maybe the reason the narrative doesn't make sense is because it doesn't.. Qualcomm never had opportunity to counter Apple's claim before -- and I'm fairly sure Qualcomm was not allow to directly counter Apple's claim here either. So what really happened, according to Qualcomm's lawsuit in US, was that Apple first drafted their business agreement with discount "rebates" with the exclusivity. Qualcomm simply acquiesced to Apple's demand, being that Apple was a huge volume customers and in the driver's seat. Remember Apple was never in rush to implement the latest or the best tech and had used Infineon chips previously. Qualcomm probably knew that they were so far ahead that they didn't have to be so aggressive, but Apple was still a huge volume customer. So after agreeing to the terms, Apple started parading around, orchestrating regulatory actions against Qualcomm claiming that Apple was forced into that exclusivity that would handicaps Qualcomm's competitors. I'm inclined to believe at this point, considering Apple's problem with GTA and past lawsuits with other wireless providers where they often came up with fictitious or groundless accusations, it was Apple's clever lawyering at work.