Posted on 01/17/2017 4:57:26 PM PST by Swordmaker
FTC alleges extracted exclusivity from Apple in exchange for reduced patent royalties
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint in federal district court charging Qualcomm Inc. with using anticompetitive tactics to maintain its monopoly in the supply of a key semiconductor device used in cell phones and other consumer products.
Qualcomm is the worlds dominant supplier of baseband processors devices that manage cellular communications in mobile products. The FTC alleges that Qualcomm has used its dominant position as a supplier of certain baseband processors to impose onerous and anticompetitive supply and licensing terms on cell phone manufacturers and to weaken competitors.
Qualcomm also holds patents that it has declared essential to industry standards that enable cellular connectivity. These standards were adopted by standard-setting organizations for the telecommunications industry, which include Qualcomm and many of its competitors. In exchange for having their patented technologies included in the standards, participants typically commit to license their patents on what are known as fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory, or FRAND, terms.
When a patent holder that has made a FRAND commitment negotiates a license, ordinarily it is constrained by the fact that if the parties are unable to reach agreement, the patent holder may have to establish reasonable royalties in court.
According to the complaint, by threatening to disrupt cell phone manufacturers supply of baseband processors, Qualcomm obtains elevated royalties and other license terms for its standard-essential patents that manufacturers would otherwise reject. These royalties amount to a tax on the manufacturers use of baseband processors manufactured by Qualcomms competitors, a tax that excludes these competitors and harms competition. Increased costs imposed by this tax are passed on to consumers, the complaint alleges.
By excluding competitors, Qualcomm impedes innovation that would offer significant consumer benefits, including those that foster the increased interconnectivity of consumer products, vehicles, buildings, and other items commonly referred to as the Internet of Things.
The FTC has charged Qualcomm with violating the FTC Act. The complaint alleges that Qualcomm:
Maintains a no license, no chips policy under which it will supply its baseband processors only on the condition that cell phone manufacturers agree to Qualcomms preferred license terms. The FTC alleges that this tactic forces cell phone manufacturers to pay elevated royalties to Qualcomm on products that use a competitors baseband processors. According to the Commissions complaint, this is an anticompetitive tax on the use of rivals processors. No license, no chips is a condition that other suppliers of semiconductor devices do not impose. The risk of losing access to Qualcomm baseband processors is too great for a cell phone manufacturer to bear because it would preclude the manufacturer from selling phones for use on important cellular networks.
Refuses to license standard-essential patents to competitors. Despite its commitment to license standard-essential patents on FRAND terms, Qualcomm has consistently refused to license those patents to competing suppliers of baseband processors.
Extracted exclusivity from Apple in exchange for reduced patent royalties. Qualcomm precluded Apple from sourcing baseband processors from Qualcomms competitors from 2011 to 2016. Qualcomm recognized that any competitor that won Apples business would become stronger, and used exclusivity to prevent Apple from working with and improving the effectiveness of Qualcomms competitors.
The FTC is seeking a court order to undo and prevent Qualcomms unfair methods of competition in violation of the FTC Act. The FTC has asked the court to order Qualcomm to cease its anticompetitive conduct and take actions to restore competitive conditions.
The Commission vote to file the complaint was 2-1. Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen dissented and issued a statement. Both a public and sealed version of the complaint were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on January 17, 2017.
NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has reason to believe that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.
Source: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission
I $mell a huge fine coming.
Pinging dayglored and ThunderSleeps for their ping lists due to cross platform interest in this article.
The latest Apple/Mac/iOS Pings can be found by searching Keyword "ApplePingList" on FreeRepublic's Search.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.