> Depending on the wording of Qualcomm's architectural ARM license, it seems like that might cover Nuvia's IP? Right, but ARM says "Nuvia’s licensing fees and

> Depending on the wording of Qualcomm's architectural ARM license, it seems like that might cover Nuvia's IP? Right, but ARM says "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" Basically ARM says Qualcomm should pay more than they did before because no, their blanket doesn't cover Nuvia. > so this will eventually collapse into a new licensing agreement that covers all claims Obviously. That's the crux of the matter. Qualcomm says they shouldn't pay more, ARM says they should.