6 ms·

If they think they are correct stopping Apple selling products would have a huge negative effect on their royalty collection, they need to walk a line that does

by gehsty 8y ago

If they think they are correct stopping Apple selling products would have a huge negative effect on their royalty collection, they need to walk a line that does not impact revenue but does not undermine their belief that Apple are wrong.

cronix 8y ago
I'm not in this business so I don't know the answer to this. Does Apple only have to pay Qualcomm a royalty for sold devices, or manufactured devices? To me, it seems it should be for the quantity of manufactured devices since the tech is in the phone regardless of whether it has been sold or not.
- mygo 8y ago
  That should be up to Qualcomm how they price their royalties / construct their payment agreements
  - syshum 8y ago
    Their FRAND Agreements with the standards bodies says other wise which Qualcomm voluntary committed to when they submitted their patented technology for consideration into international standards
    - mygo 8y ago
      learn something every day thanks
- Retric 8y ago
  That's not important. Apple argues they are buying chips from companies that already paid to use Qualcomm's patents. So, Qualcomm can't double dip and have Apple pay the same patent for the same psychical device.
- gehsty 8y ago
  I think it is linked to devices sold - and it is priced as percentage of the retail price. My understanding is that Apple do not agree with the price paid to Qualcomm being linked to the purchase price of the phone, which you can understand - why as a consumer should you pay more for the same IP if you want extra storage in your iPhone? I think this disagreement came around before Apple ramped up the prices with the X / XS / XS Max... We should have seen the canary in the coal mine :)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]