Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Recommends Import Ban On iPhones After Latest Apple Vs. Qualcomm Verdict (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the cease-and-desist dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The latest chapter in the ongoing and messy Apple versus Qualcomm legal battle might mean a U.S. import ban on some iPhone models. A U.S. trade judge has found Apple guilty of infringing on two Qualcomm patents related to power management and data download speeds. As a result, the judge -- International Trade Commission Judge MaryJoan McNamara -- says some iPhone models containing competing Intel modems might be blocked from shipping from China, where they're manufactured, to the U.S. The judgment is still pending review by the ITC. Qualcomm is expecting another ruling in a second case it brought to the ITC later today that is not expected to include an import ban on iPhones. Regardless, this ruling is another blow to Apple, which, earlier this month, was found to have infringed on three separate Qualcomm patents in one of many other legal skirmishes playing out between the two companies. Next month the two companies will square off in court to discuss Qualcomm's alleged anti-competitive licensing strategies and the patent royalties it claims Apple owes for disputing the terms of their long-standing relationship.

5 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. That's a lot of power in one person's hands by danbuter · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's hard to believe one person could completely shut down a company like this. I'm hoping the judge isn't some 75 year old who doesn't even know how to turn on a computer.

    1. Re:That's a lot of power in one person's hands by Daemonik · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A single judge can decide if someone lives or dies and you're shocked about how much power they have over a corporation? Perhaps you should check your priorities.

      Besides, a jury usually decides guilt, the judge decides the penalty.

  2. Ban on iPhones? by DickBreath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Woo Hoo!

    It's about time Apple got a real taste of being on the wrong end of a patent infringement lawsuit.

    Clearly Apple must feel that they didn't infringe. But then so did all those Apple was suing over patents not very many years ago. Pinch to zoom? Bouncy scrolling? And wanting to get 100% of the device retail cost as damages? Seriously?

    IMO this couldn't happen to a better target than Apple.

    FYI . . . long ago I was a card carrying Apple fanboy and longtime developer back in the Classic Mac days. Even after moving from Mac to Linux when OSX came out, I still had fond memories of Apple -- until it started all the patent lawsuits.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  3. Re:Qualcomm antennas are better right? by WankerWeasel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This isn't related to that. This suit was filed by Qualcomm when Apple decided to use Intel modems rather than theirs. They got upset over the loss of revenue from the move, so they found a patent to go after Apple over and try to force them to use their modems again.

  4. Re:Which models? by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keep in mind that Qualcomm didn't file this suit until Apple switched to using Intel chips

    You idiot, that's because Qualcomm had a patent agreement with Apple while they were supplying them the chips.
    Apple didn't like how Qualcomm based the royalty payment on the retail price of the phone, the same as all the other manufacturers, because Apple have been skyrocketing the retail price - like paying $1099 for a 64GB phone or $1449 for a 256GB model. That's $350 for 192GB. A 256GB micro SD card costs less than $100.
    They stopped paying Qualcomm royalties, so Qualcomm sued for infringement.

    That's how it's supposed to work.