One after another Qualcomm is facing the cases increasing on it. Just after being sued by United States Federal Trade Commission for antitrust violation, Apple also jumped in and sued the chipmaker for $1 billion.
According to Apple, Qualcomm “has unfairly insisted on charging royalties for technologies they have nothing to do with”.
“Apple mentioned in its statement as we move toward technology and introduce new and upgraded features like advanced displays, cameras or anything in our phones, Qualcomm asks for money without any reason and effort and it becomes too expensive for Apple to work on new upgrades, “Apple Stated that “”
“The more Apple innovates with unique features such as TouchID, advanced displays, and cameras, to name just a few, the more money Qualcomm collects for no reason and the more expensive it becomes for Apple to fund these innovations,” Apple said in a statement.
“Qualcomm manufactured its business on earlier, principles, however, fortifies its predominance through segregated strategies and inordinate eminences. In spite of being only one of over twelve organizations who added to essential cell measures, Qualcomm demands to charge Apple no less than five times more in installments than the various cell patent licensors.”
Apple also added in a claim that by just increasing the phone’s internal memory from 128 GB to 256 GB Qualcomm will receive a huge amount of royalty.
The claim takes after a protestation against Qualcomm prior this week by the FTC that revolved around its authorizing business. Qualcomm is the overwhelming provider of modem chips that empower cell phones to be linked with networks, and the organization extricates authorizing expenses for almost every cutting edge cell phone on the planet. The FTC said the San Diego-based chipmaker utilizes its predominant position to keep up an unlawful imposing business model to the detriment of accomplices like Apple.”Qualcomm also paid $850 million fine to South Korean regulators over its patent-licensing practices”.
Here’s Apple’s original full statement:
For many years Qualcomm has unfairly insisted on charging royalties for technologies they have nothing to do with. The more Apple innovates with unique features such as TouchID, advanced displays, and cameras, to name just a few, the more money Qualcomm collects for no reason and the more expensive it becomes for Apple to fund these innovations. Qualcomm built its business on older, legacy, standards but reinforces its dominance through exclusionary tactics and excessive royalties. Despite being just one of over a dozen companies who contributed to basic cellular standards, Qualcomm insists on charging Apple at least five times more in payments than all the other cellular patent licensors we have agreements with combined.
To protect this business scheme Qualcomm has taken increasingly radical steps, most recently withholding nearly $1B in payments from Apple as retaliation for responding truthfully to law enforcement agencies investigating them.
Apple believes deeply in innovation and we have always been willing to pay fair and reasonable rates for patents we use. We are extremely disappointed in the way Qualcomm is conducting its business with us and unfortunately after years of disagreement over what constitutes a fair and reasonable royalty we have no choice left but to turn to the courts.
Qualcomm wrote the statement:
While we are still in the process of reviewing the complaint in detail, it is quite clear that Apple’s claims are baseless. Apple has intentionally mischaracterized our agreements and negotiations, as well as the enormity and value of the technology we have invented, contributed and shared with all mobile device makers through our licensing program. Apple has been actively encouraging regulatory attacks on Qualcomm’s business in various jurisdictions around the world, as reflected in the recent KFTC decision and FTC complaint, by misrepresenting facts and withholding information. We welcome the opportunity to have these meritless claims heard in court where we will be entitled to full discovery of Apple’s practices and a robust examination of the merits.