Anyone knows where the claim that the Nuvia licence was server-specifc comes from? This seems to be a bad copy-pasta from the Reuters article (which does not cl

Anyone knows where the claim that the Nuvia licence was server-specifc comes from? This seems to be a bad copy-pasta from the Reuters article (which does not claim this), and no company ever claimed this AFAIK. Edit: the answer can be found in the court documents, here Qualcomm's Sept 22 answers to Arm's claims: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.79892/gov.uscourts.ded.79892.15.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.798... ; the gist is that Arm claims Nuvia's licencing fee was higher than Qualcomm's because it was negotiated with the intent of making server chips. Qualcomm admits as much: > Defendants further admit that NUVIA and ARM intended the licensing fees and royalties set forth in the NUVIA ALA to apply to future server products, not products for other markets