4 ms·

The reporting on this article is just bad. The issue is not Qualcomm taking over Nuvia's business and license. According to Arm the Nuvia license is contractua

The reporting on this article is just bad. The issue is not Qualcomm taking over Nuvia's business and license. According to Arm the Nuvia license is contractually tied to server/datacenter usage, while Qualcomm's acquisition of Nuvia packaged these server cores into "Oryon" for PC use in the Snapdragon X Elite SoC and intends to use them in smartphones too, breaching the original agreement. Here's a better source: https://www.heise.de/en/news/ARM-torpedoes-Windows-on-ARM-Demands-destruction-of-all-PCs-with-Snapdragon-X-9758434.html https://www.heise.de/en/news/ARM-torpedoes-Windows-on-ARM-De...

dvdkon 2y ago
Do you have a source not behind a "cookie wall"? I remember Qualcomm making phone SoCs with custom cores some years back. Why is it suddenly an issue now? Or were those just rebrands of tweaked Cortex designs? EDIT: From reading the Reuters article [0] it seems that Arm's argument is that since Nuvia's cores were developed under a now-terminated licence, Qualcomm doesn't have a right to use them, their other licences notwithstanding. [0]: https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2024-06-10/analysis-arm-qualcomm-legal-battle-seen-disrupting-ai-powered-pc-wave https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2024-06-10/a...
- jraph 2y ago
  (The page displays fine with js disabled)
- bpfrh 2y ago
  The argument is that Nuvia got a licence for server usage and development support from arm to develop custom arm processors. Qualcom now wants to use technology developt under a specific licence agreement in use cases not covered in that licence agreement, because they have general licence agreement with arm. The question is: Does the general licence agreement from qualcom override the specific licence agreement between Nuvia and arm for this specific technology. I found some sources which partially explains this: https://www.ft.com/content/5535ce39-ab22-497a-a8d6-52a690d1b446 https://www.ft.com/content/5535ce39-ab22-497a-a8d6-52a690d1b... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/why-arms-lawsuit-against-qualcomm-is-a-big-deal.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/why-arms-lawsuit-against-qua... (...Nuvia, a startup founded by former Apple and Google engineers, was developing a server chip with custom cores under an architecture license. It also had access to Arm’s core designs....)
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    I suspect it's going to boil down to whether any of the IP Nuvia had access to but Qualcomm did not made it into the cores. But it could also easily come down to some details of the wording of the contracts in terms of how that license is granted. Either way, this request for the destruction of laptops at the early stage is clearly a negotiation point: if the court grants it, which seems unlikely, it'll be a strong bargening chip for a negotiation a settlement in cash/royalties/etc, not the actual goal of ARM.
    - bpfrh 2y ago
      Agreed, I think on your last point ARM is also trying for a fast case/settlement as they are in a difficult position: They don't want to have a long fight expensive fight with qualcom and make other arm companies uneasy about investing in the arm platform. They also don't want to open the door to have companies buy their IP for "cheap" by buying smaller companies with special arm licences instead of directly negotiating with them.
      - giancarlostoro 2y ago
        > They also don't want to open the door to have companies buy their IP for "cheap" by buying smaller companies with special arm licences instead of directly negotiating with them. Is it really ARMs IP or the IP developed by the smaller company. My understanding is ARM is like a blueprint, and you then make changes as needed.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        bpfrh 2y ago
        That kinda depends on your licencing agreement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family#Licensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family#Licens... You can either licence a IP Core block(Core, gpu,etc) to embedd in your device, our you can buy an architect licence and design your own cores as long as they comply with the arm architecture. AFAIK the IP is actually buildable cores which arm get's by partnering with companies to get it right, e.g. there is not that much difference between them fully building them in house and selling them vs. letting partners build them(for the end user).
- Piraty 2y ago
  (The page displays fine with ublock-origin + blocked 3rd-party {scripts,frames} + "cookie notices" filter lists)
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  "Snapdragon X Elite" is based on the IP Qualcomm gained from the Acquisition of Nuvia, who developed this IP based on a very narrow license they got from ARM to develop for the server market. Qualcomm is trying to transfer everything Nuvia has developed under that specific narrow ARM-license to the broad license of Qualcomm and use it for "powering flagship smartphones, next-generation laptops, and digital cockpits, as well as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems, extended reality and infrastructure networking solutions" ARM has filed a lawsuit that this was never in scope of the license of Nuvia, the court-ruling is still pending on that one... The related court-filing is worth a read: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22273195/arm-v-qualcomm-99-9999-stamped-complaint.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22273195/arm-v-qualco...
  - rickdeckard 2y ago
    Moreover, Nuvia's ARM-licenses and everything produced from it became invalid with Qualcomm's acquisition, so the tech produced from it is simply not licensed anymore. In detail, the dispute goes like this: 1. ARM gave a broad range of licenses to Nuvia to develop an ARM-based architecture for use in servers, with a license-fee to match this objective (probably a favorable one for ARM, because it's a field ARM aims to expand): "Nuvia’s licensing fees and royalty rates reflected the anticipated scope and nature of Nuvia’s use of the Arm architecture. The licenses safeguarded Arm’s rights and expectations by prohibiting assignment without Arm’s consent, regardless of whether a contemplated assignee had its own Arm licenses." 2. Qualcomm acquires Nuvia with the intention to use the developed IP for (quote): "powering flagship smartphones, next-generation laptops, and digital cockpits, as well as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems, extended reality and infrastructure networking solutions" Sounds quite reasonable if the claim is validated: ARM gave favorable conditions to a startup which aimed to compete in a field where ARM is weak (servers). Now the biggest customer of the strongest revenue-market of ARM (mobile devices) has acquired that startup to repurpose their development and license to use in mobile devices, PCs, automotive, VR,...
    - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
      The part you are leaving out that before Qualcomm acquired Nuvia, they already owned a blanket license from ARM with no such use restrictions. Their claim is that they can use the IP they acquired under this older license. Which side is right or wrong here depends on the exact wording of the license between ARM and Qualcomm, and since this is not publicly known, no-one outside those companies knows which side is in the right.
- brevhtff 2y ago
  > Do you have a source not behind a "cookie wall"? Ignore it, use technical measures to overcome it, disregard it. If a stranger came up to you in the street and demanded $5 to continue looking at them, you’d tell them to fuck off (in so many words). You certainly wouldn’t avert your eyes, nor would you cough up. Fuck these bozos and their shrink wrap licenses and their cookie popups and all.
  - bee_rider 2y ago
    If someone did that, I would probably leave them alone, and if someone wanted to use them as a source, I would probably at least ask if they knew anybody more reasonable.
Tuna-Fish 2y ago
You have described the ARM position in the case. According to Qualcomm, they already have a separate architecture license from ARM that allows them to produce their own cores and sell them in whatever they want. And by their reading of that license, they can purchase the core IP they use for that from a third party, and then use it under their existing license.
- sroussey 2y ago
  If Qualcomm wins, ARM will never make sweetheart deals for startups again.
  - SR2Z 2y ago
    Good - drive them to invest in RISC-V instead.
  - gumby 2y ago
    They'll just make different sweetheart deals. The Nuvia acquisition was a great opportunity for ARM to shake down Qualcomm. Or instead of "shake down", dare I say...strongarm?
    - growse 2y ago
      furious clapping
  - toast0 2y ago
    From comments here, it sounds like if Qualcomm wins, the ARM/Nuvia deal isn't the problem, the ARM/Qualcomm one is. ARM probably already doesn't like to make broad licensing deals like that, but big customers like them, and ARM in the past couldn't afford to say no.
amadeuspagel 2y ago
> Apparently, ARM wants to push through a new licensing model to generate more revenue. The main aim is to base license costs on the price of the device rather than the processor. According to Qualcomm, this involves a one-off payment of several hundred million US dollars plus significantly higher license fees on an ongoing basis. Interesting. That's what Qualcomm itself does, right?
- sumtechguy 2y ago
  That is almost exactly how they usually do it, but they many times negotiate per company. However, it does look like ARM trying to have a redo on their contract that they have had in place for a very long time, now that ARM is more popular. When it was the cell manufactures that made it possible for ARM to be in the current position it is in precisely because of the terms ARM had in its contract years ago. Qcom may have a good case as they have put arm chips in computers before (omnitracs). ARM saying it has to be tied with a modem, and buying another company does a full reset on the existing contract may not go far.
  - somat 2y ago
    so... if qcom included a "modem" on their server board would arm be happy? well not happy, but would it satisfy arms interpretation of the contract? I could totally see every single server board saddled with some obsolete appendix of a cell baseband to satisfy the letter of some sweet contract qualcom had with arm saving the company a fair few million.
    - sumtechguy 2y ago
      Possible. But more than likely they will meet in the middle and ARM will get something and QCOM will get something. But no where near what either is asking. But qcom does have a stronger position.
karmakaze 2y ago
The story is poor, the conclusion maybe accurate in that it's likely a non-story: > Qualcomm bought a company called Nuvia to do this, and it originally used Nuvia's architectural license. Arm's argument is that the Nuvia license was canceled when it was taken over by Qualcomm. A new deal would have to be negotiated if that holds up in court. > So, there you have it. Arm wants Qualcomm to stop shipping the product it's been contesting, but to be honest, that's not usually how these things end. It's unlikely that any product will be delayed from hitting shelves. These cases tend to end with one company giving a bucket of cash to the other, and everyone moves on.

dvdkon 2y ago

Do you have a source not behind a "cookie wall"? I remember Qualcomm making phone SoCs with custom cores some years back. Why is it suddenly an issue now? Or were those just rebrands of tweaked Cortex designs? EDIT: From reading the Reuters article [0] it seems that Arm's argument is that since Nuvia's cores were developed under a now-terminated licence, Qualcomm doesn't have a right to use them, their other licences notwithstanding. [0]: https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2024-06-10/analysis-arm-qualcomm-legal-battle-seen-disrupting-ai-powered-pc-wave https://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2024-06-10/a...

jraph 2y ago
(The page displays fine with js disabled)
bpfrh 2y ago
The argument is that Nuvia got a licence for server usage and development support from arm to develop custom arm processors. Qualcom now wants to use technology developt under a specific licence agreement in use cases not covered in that licence agreement, because they have general licence agreement with arm. The question is: Does the general licence agreement from qualcom override the specific licence agreement between Nuvia and arm for this specific technology. I found some sources which partially explains this: https://www.ft.com/content/5535ce39-ab22-497a-a8d6-52a690d1b446 https://www.ft.com/content/5535ce39-ab22-497a-a8d6-52a690d1b... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/why-arms-lawsuit-against-qualcomm-is-a-big-deal.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/why-arms-lawsuit-against-qua... (...Nuvia, a startup founded by former Apple and Google engineers, was developing a server chip with custom cores under an architecture license. It also had access to Arm’s core designs....)
- rcxdude 2y ago
  I suspect it's going to boil down to whether any of the IP Nuvia had access to but Qualcomm did not made it into the cores. But it could also easily come down to some details of the wording of the contracts in terms of how that license is granted. Either way, this request for the destruction of laptops at the early stage is clearly a negotiation point: if the court grants it, which seems unlikely, it'll be a strong bargening chip for a negotiation a settlement in cash/royalties/etc, not the actual goal of ARM.
  - bpfrh 2y ago
    Agreed, I think on your last point ARM is also trying for a fast case/settlement as they are in a difficult position: They don't want to have a long fight expensive fight with qualcom and make other arm companies uneasy about investing in the arm platform. They also don't want to open the door to have companies buy their IP for "cheap" by buying smaller companies with special arm licences instead of directly negotiating with them.
    - giancarlostoro 2y ago
      > They also don't want to open the door to have companies buy their IP for "cheap" by buying smaller companies with special arm licences instead of directly negotiating with them. Is it really ARMs IP or the IP developed by the smaller company. My understanding is ARM is like a blueprint, and you then make changes as needed.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - bpfrh 2y ago
        That kinda depends on your licencing agreement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family#Licensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture_family#Licens... You can either licence a IP Core block(Core, gpu,etc) to embedd in your device, our you can buy an architect licence and design your own cores as long as they comply with the arm architecture. AFAIK the IP is actually buildable cores which arm get's by partnering with companies to get it right, e.g. there is not that much difference between them fully building them in house and selling them vs. letting partners build them(for the end user).
Piraty 2y ago
(The page displays fine with ublock-origin + blocked 3rd-party {scripts,frames} + "cookie notices" filter lists)
rickdeckard 2y ago
"Snapdragon X Elite" is based on the IP Qualcomm gained from the Acquisition of Nuvia, who developed this IP based on a very narrow license they got from ARM to develop for the server market. Qualcomm is trying to transfer everything Nuvia has developed under that specific narrow ARM-license to the broad license of Qualcomm and use it for "powering flagship smartphones, next-generation laptops, and digital cockpits, as well as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems, extended reality and infrastructure networking solutions" ARM has filed a lawsuit that this was never in scope of the license of Nuvia, the court-ruling is still pending on that one... The related court-filing is worth a read: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22273195/arm-v-qualcomm-99-9999-stamped-complaint.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22273195/arm-v-qualco...
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  Moreover, Nuvia's ARM-licenses and everything produced from it became invalid with Qualcomm's acquisition, so the tech produced from it is simply not licensed anymore. In detail, the dispute goes like this: 1. ARM gave a broad range of licenses to Nuvia to develop an ARM-based architecture for use in servers, with a license-fee to match this objective (probably a favorable one for ARM, because it's a field ARM aims to expand): "Nuvia’s licensing fees and royalty rates reflected the anticipated scope and nature of Nuvia’s use of the Arm architecture. The licenses safeguarded Arm’s rights and expectations by prohibiting assignment without Arm’s consent, regardless of whether a contemplated assignee had its own Arm licenses." 2. Qualcomm acquires Nuvia with the intention to use the developed IP for (quote): "powering flagship smartphones, next-generation laptops, and digital cockpits, as well as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems, extended reality and infrastructure networking solutions" Sounds quite reasonable if the claim is validated: ARM gave favorable conditions to a startup which aimed to compete in a field where ARM is weak (servers). Now the biggest customer of the strongest revenue-market of ARM (mobile devices) has acquired that startup to repurpose their development and license to use in mobile devices, PCs, automotive, VR,...
  - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
    The part you are leaving out that before Qualcomm acquired Nuvia, they already owned a blanket license from ARM with no such use restrictions. Their claim is that they can use the IP they acquired under this older license. Which side is right or wrong here depends on the exact wording of the license between ARM and Qualcomm, and since this is not publicly known, no-one outside those companies knows which side is in the right.
brevhtff 2y ago
> Do you have a source not behind a "cookie wall"? Ignore it, use technical measures to overcome it, disregard it. If a stranger came up to you in the street and demanded $5 to continue looking at them, you’d tell them to fuck off (in so many words). You certainly wouldn’t avert your eyes, nor would you cough up. Fuck these bozos and their shrink wrap licenses and their cookie popups and all.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  If someone did that, I would probably leave them alone, and if someone wanted to use them as a source, I would probably at least ask if they knew anybody more reasonable.

Tuna-Fish 2y ago

You have described the ARM position in the case. According to Qualcomm, they already have a separate architecture license from ARM that allows them to produce their own cores and sell them in whatever they want. And by their reading of that license, they can purchase the core IP they use for that from a third party, and then use it under their existing license.

sroussey 2y ago
If Qualcomm wins, ARM will never make sweetheart deals for startups again.
- SR2Z 2y ago
  Good - drive them to invest in RISC-V instead.
- gumby 2y ago
  They'll just make different sweetheart deals. The Nuvia acquisition was a great opportunity for ARM to shake down Qualcomm. Or instead of "shake down", dare I say...strongarm?
  - growse 2y ago
    furious clapping
- toast0 2y ago
  From comments here, it sounds like if Qualcomm wins, the ARM/Nuvia deal isn't the problem, the ARM/Qualcomm one is. ARM probably already doesn't like to make broad licensing deals like that, but big customers like them, and ARM in the past couldn't afford to say no.

amadeuspagel 2y ago

> Apparently, ARM wants to push through a new licensing model to generate more revenue. The main aim is to base license costs on the price of the device rather than the processor. According to Qualcomm, this involves a one-off payment of several hundred million US dollars plus significantly higher license fees on an ongoing basis. Interesting. That's what Qualcomm itself does, right?

sumtechguy 2y ago
That is almost exactly how they usually do it, but they many times negotiate per company. However, it does look like ARM trying to have a redo on their contract that they have had in place for a very long time, now that ARM is more popular. When it was the cell manufactures that made it possible for ARM to be in the current position it is in precisely because of the terms ARM had in its contract years ago. Qcom may have a good case as they have put arm chips in computers before (omnitracs). ARM saying it has to be tied with a modem, and buying another company does a full reset on the existing contract may not go far.
- somat 2y ago
  so... if qcom included a "modem" on their server board would arm be happy? well not happy, but would it satisfy arms interpretation of the contract? I could totally see every single server board saddled with some obsolete appendix of a cell baseband to satisfy the letter of some sweet contract qualcom had with arm saving the company a fair few million.
  - sumtechguy 2y ago
    Possible. But more than likely they will meet in the middle and ARM will get something and QCOM will get something. But no where near what either is asking. But qcom does have a stronger position.

karmakaze 2y ago

The story is poor, the conclusion maybe accurate in that it's likely a non-story: > Qualcomm bought a company called Nuvia to do this, and it originally used Nuvia's architectural license. Arm's argument is that the Nuvia license was canceled when it was taken over by Qualcomm. A new deal would have to be negotiated if that holds up in court. > So, there you have it. Arm wants Qualcomm to stop shipping the product it's been contesting, but to be honest, that's not usually how these things end. It's unlikely that any product will be delayed from hitting shelves. These cases tend to end with one company giving a bucket of cash to the other, and everyone moves on.