5 ms·

With royalties no physical goods are trading hands and the theif can continue to use/make the thing upon which royalties are owed until such time as a legal inj

With royalties no physical goods are trading hands and the theif can continue to use/make the thing upon which royalties are owed until such time as a legal injunction stops them. So it's very easy for Qualcomm to say "hey you owe us money" and for Apple to say "nuh uh" and then stall negotiations or legal proceedings for years. If Qualcomm proves victorious in a lawsuit there I always appeals and at the same time Apple can argue down damages. It's highly unlikely that Qualcomm would ever recoup the claimed amount or all of its legal fees. Because of this most lawsuits alledge ridiculous damages so that when they're reduced they fall closer to what is actually owed.

akiselev 8y ago
Apple's argument for not paying is that the royalties are for patent licenses which they have an implicit right to. They purchase Intel's radios and due to patent exhaustion, they have a right to those patents for use of the radio (since Intel has already paid those license fees).
- nwmcsween 8y ago
  My understanding is its Apple's designs and Intel just manufactures Apple's designs which infringes on Qualcoms patents, this is a very dangerous game to play.
  - sjwright 8y ago
    That’s an interesting assertion, one that definitely requires a citation. Even if Intel is only making these chips because of Apple, the real test is whether or not Intel is offering these chips to other companies. I would be surprised if they weren’t, even if nobody else is actually buying them. After all, if you’re a smaller player, why would you buy anything other then Qualcomm? It takes a big, assertive company like Apple to play these games.
    - kbenson 8y ago
      > Even if Intel is only making these chips because of Apple, the real test is whether or not Intel is offering these chips to other companies. Even if they are, I think that may not matter specifically for the Apple case. In that case, it likely matters whether Intel paid, and whether the contract outlined who was to pay. It's entirely possible for Intel to have been working thinking Apple was to pay that royalty since it was work for hire and to sell chips to other companies while paying the royalty themselves (if the contract allowed selling to others). If Qualcomm is legally due some money, it will come from someone if it hasn't been paid (and it sounds like it hasn't). It may come down to a contract dispute between Intel and Apple, but I don't see that preventing Qualcomm from getting money in the end.

akiselev 8y ago

Apple's argument for not paying is that the royalties are for patent licenses which they have an implicit right to. They purchase Intel's radios and due to patent exhaustion, they have a right to those patents for use of the radio (since Intel has already paid those license fees).

nwmcsween 8y ago
My understanding is its Apple's designs and Intel just manufactures Apple's designs which infringes on Qualcoms patents, this is a very dangerous game to play.
- sjwright 8y ago
  That’s an interesting assertion, one that definitely requires a citation. Even if Intel is only making these chips because of Apple, the real test is whether or not Intel is offering these chips to other companies. I would be surprised if they weren’t, even if nobody else is actually buying them. After all, if you’re a smaller player, why would you buy anything other then Qualcomm? It takes a big, assertive company like Apple to play these games.
  - kbenson 8y ago
    > Even if Intel is only making these chips because of Apple, the real test is whether or not Intel is offering these chips to other companies. Even if they are, I think that may not matter specifically for the Apple case. In that case, it likely matters whether Intel paid, and whether the contract outlined who was to pay. It's entirely possible for Intel to have been working thinking Apple was to pay that royalty since it was work for hire and to sell chips to other companies while paying the royalty themselves (if the contract allowed selling to others). If Qualcomm is legally due some money, it will come from someone if it hasn't been paid (and it sounds like it hasn't). It may come down to a contract dispute between Intel and Apple, but I don't see that preventing Qualcomm from getting money in the end.