Roger Fingas
Lawyers squared off in a San Diego federal court last Friday in an initial hearing of Apple's lawsuit against Qualcomm, with the latter standing accused of antitrust violations and breach of contract.
"We believe we are standing in a boxing ring with our gloves up, with the biggest boxer in the world punching away at us," said a lawyer for Qualcomm, according to The Recorder. Aside from representation for Apple and Qualcomm, another legal team was present on behalf of Apple manufacturers Foxconn, Pegatron, Wistron, and Compal, from which Qualcomm is trying to secure continued royalty payments despite Apple's orders that they cease while litigation is ongoing.
Apple has accused Qualcomm of withholding nearly $1 billion in promised rebates in retaliation for it cooperating with a South Korean antitrust investigation. It further claims that Qualcomm has abused its market position to demand unfair royalties on cellular baseband chips, and even that Qualcomm shouldn't get any royalties at all, as a result of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on patent exhaustion.
Qualcomm is pursuing a counterclaim, and has asked U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel to not only order Apple manufacturers to resume royalties but put lawsuits in other countries on hold while he decides FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) royalty rates for Qualcomm's patents.
At Friday's hearing, a Qualcomm attorney said that the company has seen a 20 percent drop in market cap since Apple launched its lawsuit, and that another, unspecified client recently stopped paying royalties as well while waiting for the outcome of Apple's suit. The situation is putting shareholder pressure on executives, and risking research and development investments as the industry moves towards 5G cellular, he argued.
Curiel commented that the Federal Circuit has said missed R&D projects can't be considered irreparable harm, and that investors may also be reacting to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's antitrust suit.
An Apple lawyer stated that the company is suing over 18 specific patents, and won't consent to adjudication on a worldwide FRAND license. The two companies were trying to negotiate a license in 2016, but talks fell apart.
"The fact that these negotiations broke down does not mean the court has the authority to step in and say 'I will determine what is fair'," the lawyer suggested. Curiel countered that Apple took the opposite position in a FRAND case with Motorola several years ago — something the Apple attorney admitted to, while pointing out that the company's argument was rejected.
-m.jpg)
Charles Martin
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
Malcolm Owen
Andrew Orr
William Gallagher
Sponsored Content
4 Comments
Lawyers, it is dawn. Please prepare your Handbags. :) :) :wink:
Qualcomm whining about a 20% fall in in market cap is to no one's fault but its own. A reckoning is coming towards Qualcomm and they are going to get swatted like a fly.
To think how Qualcomm was gouging its own customers, expecting to receive royalties on the entire end-product versus just on the chips they make was nothing less than extortion.
I'm glad Intel came in a took away a good chunk of Qualcomm's business. Intel better step up to the plate performance-wise to Qualcomm's offerings quickly before they too become a could've/should've/would've player.
Judge Lucy Koh must be heartbroken she has no invovement in this case.
Love this from Wikipedia: "In July 2015, the company cut 4,700 jobs or about 15 percent of its 31,300 current workforce due to decline of sales. Executive management knew this was coming so they came up with a plan to retain its employees. However, instead of paying reasonable salary, executive management used this plan as a justification to give themselves a big payout first and then lay off employees later."
I guess the 118 million "bonus" wasn't well deserved.