4 ms·
No, Qualcomm had already acquired an arch license from ARM, they had one before the purchase. The issue is that the Nuvia arch license had extra terms that the
by Tuna-Fish 2y ago
No, Qualcomm had already acquired an arch license from ARM, they had one before the purchase. The issue is that the Nuvia arch license had extra terms that the Qualcomm one didn't. ARM claims that the IP created under the Nuvia license cannot be transferred to be under the Qualcomm license. Qualcomm contends that it can.
- wyldfire 2y ago> No, Qualcomm had already acquired an arch license from ARM, they had one before the purchase I know they were making their own cores several years ago but for a bunch of design cycles they used ARM reference cores. during that time they were still an architectural licensee? Or they let it lapse and then re-licensed just before/after the Nuvia acquisition?
- colechristensen 2y ago> The issue is that the Nuvia arch license had extra terms that the Qualcomm one didn't. > Qualcomm bought a company because they had a license arm wouldn’t sell them. These statements aren't different. You're disagreeing by slightly rewording what I wrote.
- Tuna-Fish 2y agoNo. Qualcomm bought Nuvia not because they wanted the license Nuvia had, because that license was server-only, with a "don't compete with our stuff on mobile" carveout, but because they wanted the IP. The license that Qualcomm has is strictly better than what Nuvia had, and no-one wants the Nuvia license.