Qualcomm Pushes Forward on iPhone and iPad Sales Ban

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,853
So the squabble between Qualcomm and Apple has not exactly been a secret, but Qualcomm upped the stakes a bit yesterday by filing lawsuits for patent infringement in order to get sales injunctions against many of Apple's products in the U.S. as reported by The Register. We will keep our eyes peeled on this to how the court reacts 4 years from now.

Qualcomm is upping the stakes in its legal war against Apple by accusing the Cupertino idiot-tax operation of infringing six patents. The California chip designer today said iPhones and iPads using Intel's 4G wireless chips are effectively using a half-dozen Qualcomm inventions without permission. Now, Qualcomm is asking the US International Trade Commission to ban imports of those mobes and fondleslabs into America from their Chinese factories. Qualy also wants all marketing and distribution of the iOS handhelds to be outlawed in the US.
 
hmmm that is interesting now. I always figured apple would win any court battle against samsung because apple is an american company. I am not so sure about this though since they are both american companies. On quick glance, isn't this apple being cheap?
 
So, there has to be more to this lawsuit than this. From the best I can understand from the article, Apple uses Intel chips for wireless technology. Those chips contain tech patented by Qualcomm. Wouldn't Intel be the patent infringer here? If Intel properly licensed the tech from Qualcomm, then sold the chips to Apple, QC doesn't have a case, and this would be thrown out. If Intel is infringing on QC's patents, I don't think they'd have any standing to go after Apple, unless they were also suing Intel and every other handset maker who uses the Intel chips.

Unless this really is a frivolous suit simply designed to give Apple headaches. In which case this makes me view Qualcomm very poorly.
 
hmmm that is interesting now. I always figured apple would win any court battle against samsung because apple is an american company. I am not so sure about this though since they are both american companies. On quick glance, isn't this apple being cheap?

Not being cheap...being ruthless. Apple did not get the warchest they have by "playing fair".
 
This is payback for both the FTC anti-trust lawsuit against Qualcomm's "no license, no chips" policy, of which Apple is on the FTC's side, bigly. And it's a return shot at Apple's refusal to pay license fees and associated $1 billion lawsuit against Qualcomm.
 
So, there has to be more to this lawsuit than this. From the best I can understand from the article, Apple uses Intel chips for wireless technology. Those chips contain tech patented by Qualcomm. Wouldn't Intel be the patent infringer here? If Intel properly licensed the tech from Qualcomm, then sold the chips to Apple, QC doesn't have a case, and this would be thrown out. If Intel is infringing on QC's patents, I don't think they'd have any standing to go after Apple, unless they were also suing Intel and every other handset maker who uses the Intel chips.

Unless this really is a frivolous suit simply designed to give Apple headaches. In which case this makes me view Qualcomm very poorly.

Not the same thing. This is an Apple chip produced by Intel for all intents and purposes thus the legal responsibility falls to Apple.
 
So, there has to be more to this lawsuit than this. From the best I can understand from the article, Apple uses Intel chips for wireless technology. Those chips contain tech patented by Qualcomm. Wouldn't Intel be the patent infringer here? If Intel properly licensed the tech from Qualcomm, then sold the chips to Apple, QC doesn't have a case, and this would be thrown out. If Intel is infringing on QC's patents, I don't think they'd have any standing to go after Apple, unless they were also suing Intel and every other handset maker who uses the Intel chips.

Unless this really is a frivolous suit simply designed to give Apple headaches. In which case this makes me view Qualcomm very poorly.

Yeah, something doesn't quite add up. We're missing info.
 
The Vulture coined the fondleslab term back in the early heyday of the iPad, mocking tablet utility and highlighting its status signalling.
 
This is a tactic known as "speaking loudly and carrying a small stick." By making outlandish demands based on a relatively minor infraction they are trying to boost their chances at a moderate settlement, although the bigger issue here (and still relevant to my name for the tactic) is that they don't want other companies following suit.
 
Back
Top