Slashdot Mirror
Judge Recommends Import Ban On iPhones After Latest Apple Vs. Qualcomm Verdict (theverge.com)
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.
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.
I've been trying to figure out which models are affected, but so far haven't found it in any of the reporting. Recent bans over Qualcomm's patents have only affected older (usually outdated) models, or else have only affected models that hadn't yet received the latest software updates. I'm wondering whether this is more of the same or whether this will actually have an effect on current flagship models running the latest version of iOS.
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.
If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. https://www.reuters.com/articl...
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.
Are you deluded? They violated the qualcomm patents because they implemented part of the modem components in software without licensing the patents qualcomm had on those components. Qualcomm previously provided those bits as part of the modem they supplied to Apple, when Apple switched to Intel there were some bits missing, Apple implemented them in software and got caught violating one of the qualcomm patents and slapped with a sales ban in China as a result, they then went and changed the software to stop violating that particular patent.
This isn't about companies being upset at eachother, it's a clear cut case of patent infringement and Apple litigates such things in exactly the same way over equally or even more frivolous nonsense patents. See their various lawsuits against Samsung as an example where they also sought a sales ban. Good for the goose, good for the gander. Obviously Apple fanboys can't see it that way though.
The bans will be for specific models that have been found to be infringing.
These cases take so long to complete that new models are out and the ones being banned aren't being shipped anymore.
"They violated the qualcomm patents because they implemented part of the modem components in software without licensing the patents qualcomm had on those components."
Sounds like you're the deluded one. Removing the need for hardware by using software is novel and unique, Qualcomm didn't do it, and thus Qualcomm shouldn't have had any fucking win related to that.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
No, they sued because Apple stole their patented technology and gave it to Intel, because Intel modems sucked and Apple wanted them to be as good as Qualcomm ones.
Apple likes to have two sources for every part they buy in, both as insurance if one has supply issues and to play each supplier off the other on price. Unfortunately for Apple Qualcomm modems are significantly better than Intel ones, and Apple actually had to artificially slow down the Qualcomm ones to make iPhones using them perform the same as iPhones with Intel modems.
In an effort to help Intel improve Apple gave their engineers some remedial classes based on the super secret NDA-protected information that Qualcomm gave them. Qualcomm found out, sued and won.
Apple is guilty, caught red handed. At this point they aren't even denying it any more, just arguing over the punishment and trying to fight back by moaning about Qualcomm's licencing terms. See, Qualcomm is required to licence patents under fair and reasonable terms, and that usually means swapping patent licences... But Apple's patents are all shit, rounded corners and bouncy scrolling, and of no use to Qualcomm so they just asked for cash. Same terms as everyone else paying cash, in fact, but Apple thinks it's special and should get a discount.
Apparently being better than Intel is an antitrust violation because how can Apple force them to licence at a lower price if they are better!? It's unfair, like how Lexus rips everyone off by charging more than Dacia just because their cars are better. If they weren't an illegal monopoly they would make worse cars and sell them at the same price as a Fiat 500.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
But very mature of the android crowd to use homophobic slurs.
Are gay Android users homophobic??
Yes; you're a fucking moron.
Apple is the Scientology of the electronic gadget business.
They are in the cash-in phase. Eventually there will be all kinds of shit branded Apple. Like the lowest-end Android tablets which get branded Polaroid and RCA, two other famous brands.
Eventually the Apple brand will be something that's slapped on all sorts of third rate products. Packard-Bell was an electronics company with a good reputation in the past. The brand was valuable with older people who remembered it from their youth. Polaroid and RCA are other 'brands' that are in the recycle phase and get slapped on lower-end electronic gadgets at this point in their deterioration. Apple has a valuable brand and they're working hard to come up with ways to expand that brand. Eventually it flares out though. Is there a shitty Apple coffee maker in your grandchildren's future? Probably.
Sounds like you're the deluded one. Removing the need for hardware by using software is novel and unique, Qualcomm didn't do it, and thus Qualcomm shouldn't have had any fucking win related to that.
You can't generally work around a patent by implementing the patented functionality in software rather than hardware, or vice versa.
It was completely fine for Apple to implement the functionality in software (or hardware, whatever), as long as they paid the appropriate royalties to the patent holder. Or, alternatively, Apple could have found a different approach to solve the problem that didn't infringe on the patent. Having failed to do both, Qualcomm will be awarded whatever remedies the court deems appropriate.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
That is a seriously twisted view of what happened. Not surprised an apple fanboy would view theft that way but how the fuck did you get modded up so much? Until Apple switched to intel they were NOT violating patents and paying royalties. Switching vendors did not trigger the lawsuit, it was stopping paying what they legally owed.
Apple is not going into bankerupcy any time soon lol. Even if apple completely shut its operations but kept everyone on the payroll and kept paying its rent it could survive for decades simply on cash in hand. It's a company with astronomical wealth
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Always a pleasure when Apple gets whacked by patents. Only because of the round corners and all that swaggering.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
When you use products by a patent holder, that isn't a problem. Apple wants to use Qualcomm patents without using Qualcomm products, then Apple should have paid the license fees. It is as simple as that. The fact that Apple decided not to pay any royalty fees and allow the debt to go up and up just asks for a judge to insist that Apple pay what is owed right now, not over a period of time. Apple has all that money "in the bank", so has no excuses for not paying, except for greed and general iDouchery.
You can't generally work around a patent by implementing the patented functionality in software rather than hardware, or vice versa.
Bullshit.
Patents are "gotten around" every single day by someone finding an alternative method to achieve the same goal.
That is perfectly legal
Using the same method but doing it in software rather than hardware (or vice versa), is not "finding an alternative method".
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.