Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Qualcomm Asks China To Ban the iPhone XS and XR (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the add-it-to-the-list dept.

After securing a win in court earlier this week to ban Apple's older phones, Qualcomm is trying to get the newer iPhones banned too. "According to the Financial Times, Qualcomm has now asked Chinese courts to issue an injunction that bans Apple from selling the iPhone XS, XS Max, and XR within the country due to the same case of possible patent infringement," reports The Verge. From the report: The new filing will escalate the companies' legal conflict in China, where Apple has so far ignored a court-ordered sales ban. Apple claims the ban only applied to phones running iOS 11 and earlier. Since its phones have now been updated to iOS 12, Apple believes they can remain on sale, and so it has continued to sell them. According to the Financial Times, the Chinese court's order doesn't specifically mention any version of Apple's operating system. That doesn't necessarily mean Apple is wrong, but it does mean that there's more to be hashed out.

5 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. What a joke by hoofie · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of course China is really big on enforcing Patent Infringement isn't it ?

  2. So, it's not really a patent issue... by rmdingler · · Score: 2

    Trade wars lead to protectionist trade policies, and before you know it, we're back to paying more for the same shit we could have done without in the first place.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  3. Baseband Alliance needed by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It would be good to see all the big phone players get together to produce a secure open radio platform that could be masked out by whatever fab wants to run the job for a given integration.

    I mean, this is commodity today - phone vendors haven't competed on reception quality in over a decade. They gain more by making the radio a commodity together than they do by playing Qualcomm's bitches.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. Simple solution to this by registrations_suck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Require "industry standards" to be:

    0). Approved by the FCC AND
    a). Based on royalty-free technology OR
    b). State a simple, VOLUME-BASED royalty structure.

    The more devices you sell, the more you pay - perhaps on a regressive scale. The price of the device should be irrelevant. Pay patent owners based on what THEY are selling not the device-makers.

  5. As a Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a Canadian, I can tell you that *There is no rule of law in China*. There is no independent court in China. Every court decision is a directive by the politbureau. Here is how I know. A few days ago, the US asked Canada to detain a Huawei C.F.O. for extradition. Canada did. China does not seem to realize that Canada has laws, and judges are involved, not politicians. Since that time, China has illegally detained two Canadians (the second just yesterday). Yet China keeps demanding politicians in Canada cause the release of the Huawei CFO. In Canada, politicians *CANNOT* tell judges what to do, they can only make laws. Judges are *ALWAYS* independent. But the stupid stupid stupid Chinese can't seem to get this. ...because politicians yelling at judges is *exactly* how its done in China. So when you say "Chinese company won a court ruling in China", what you really mean is "politicians want Huawei in China, not Apple", and that is all there is to know. It has nothing to do with patents, or technology. Some people might be confused, hope this clears it up.