Splitting Up With Apple is a Chipmaker's Nightmare (engadget.com)

Apple is such a powerful company that, for third-party suppliers, it's hard not to become reliant on the cash that it pays you. Engadget adds: But when Apple says that it's done, choosing to move whatever technology you provide in house, the results can be really painful. Imagination Technologies is one such supplier, famously designing the iPhone's PowerVR graphics as well as pushing MIPS, a rival to ARM. But back in March, Imagination publicly announced that Apple was ditching it in favor of its own graphics silicon. Now, Imagination has revealed that it's going to take Apple to dispute resolution, maintaining that the iPhone maker used Imagination's IP without permission. It's the second chipmaker in recent months who believes Apple isn't playing fair, with Qualcomm counter-suing Apple in its own licensing dispute. Secondly, Imagination is going to have to sell off MIPS and Ensigma, two parts of its business that aren't as profitable as PowerVR. Gamers with long memories will remember that MIPS designed the CPUs that lurked inside the PlayStation, PS2 and Nintendo 64.

Comments

One Imagines

[Luthair]

Its pretty much impossible to build a modern GPU without infringing on the patents of one of the existing players. Even Intel is stuck paying licensing fees from AMD or nVidia, its hard to see how Apple won't have to do the same.

Re:One Imagines

[Anonymous Coward]

Notably though, Imagination Tech's important patents have just expired. There's a reason that nVidia and AMD both suddenly implemented tile based renderers, and Apple suddenly decided they could viably produce their own GPU.

Going for a settlement with Apple?

[mykepredko]

For Qualcomm and Imagination, I would think that their contracts with Apple were pretty iron-clad. Apple didn't become one of the biggest companies on the planet by signing deals that wasn't in their favour. Potential for abuse by Apple when the contracts were drawn up aside, I would think that the contracts are pretty solid and Apple knows exactly what it's rights are and has protected itself.

This means that the only recourse for (former) suppliers is to go after Apple, primarily in the court of public opinion, to see if there's a chance for a settlement to avoid Apple's public reputation being damaged. Although after Jobs, I don't see how it could get any worse on that front.

Re:Going for a settlement with Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had the misfortune of dealing with Apple on the business side, and they just make stuff up as they go along. They will make all manner of completely unreasonable demands, which have nothing at all to do with the contract, and just threaten to rip up said contract if they don't get what they want. Not to mention they will get a bug up their ass about enforcing one part of the contract one week, then the next week they couldn't care less about that, but this other minor inconsequential provision is now crucial, and they'll club you over the head with the threat of ripping up the contract if you don't comply. They'll claim they have "statistics" or some such that shows you aren't in line with other similar companies, but you'll never actually get to SEE the evidence, because it's confidential or some other nonsense. You'll be assigned an Apple minder, who will typically be completely unavailable if you try calling/emailing them, but will miraculously find time in their busy schedule if it's to call/email you about something you're not doing right. Some of their mid to upper level managers will even be verbally abusive if you have face to face meetings, and they'll even ambush you. They'll invite you to Cupertino, saying it's a friendly little junket to tour the Apple facilities, except you'll be ushered into a conference room where a number of execs will accuse you of a bunch of things.

Essentially, Apple's M.O. is to just threaten to rip up your contract if you don't drop trou, bend over, and take a good ass pounding whenever they feel like giving you one. The little bits you see in stories like this don't even represent the tip of the iceberg, they're like the dusting of snow on the iceberg's surface.

and that would be...

[holophrastic]

And that would be the reason my father told me never to let one client dedicate more than 30% of my business. It's also why I told my father that reliable clients sometimes get heavy discounts, to offset the lack of sales/collection efforts, which keeps them from rolling their own.