There is absolutely zero chance that Qualcomm could exist without being able to protect its IP in court. The model of their licensing business is to do years of

There is absolutely zero chance that Qualcomm could exist without being able to protect its IP in court. The model of their licensing business is to do years of R&D, then spend years selling rights to the work product to pay for the next cycle of R&D. Cost of revenues for the licensing business (R&D) are out of sync with the sales that they later generate. Licensing revenue was 40% of QCOM's total revenue last quarter. How exactly do you suggest they make money by selling IP without a legal environment that protects their contracts and patents? Same goes for ARM. Their entire business is making and licensing designs internationally. That's what they do. That's how they make money. > The thing is, just macros, or verilog code alone is near useless without tons of documentation, spoonfeeding by ARM FAEs, and tooling support. Looking at past cases, I think this is an extremely poor characterization of how infringement actually happens. More likely, (A) customers (or former customers) use licensed technology for which they underpay (or refuse to pay); or (B) competitors hiring engineers from customers or former customers to compete with the company.