Last month, when the ITC decided to investigate a previous ruling between Apple and Samsung, who knew that the investigation would spiral into reality-TV drama and name-calling? Especially from a company that was last seen as a major player on the mobile device scene before reality TV even existed? See, this is why we can't have nice things.
Qualcomm, the company that makes a boatload of money manufacturing the baseband chips for all Apple wireless devices beginning with the iPhone 4S and 4G iPad, ruthlessly dissed Cupertino in court this week. Clearly fearful of the direction the U.S. courts are heading with regard to how they treat the licensing of Standard Essential Patents, Qualcomm has gone on the offensive and unloaded a big bucket of insults aimed at Apple.
When the ITC decided to revisit an earlier ruling that found Apple did not infringe on several Samsung patents, they posed several questions to Apple and Samsung. The questions were designed to get some clarity from each player as to how they viewed Standard Essential Patents, licensing, and FRAND issues. Apparently, Qualcomm, who used to make most of its money making products but now brings home most of its bacon by licensing out patents, took umbrage at the way Cupertino answered the questions.
My first mobile phone, when Qualcomm made phones.
Calling Apple an "infringer" and its positions on injunctions "a total sham" and "absurd", Qualcomm has taken the curious position of punking out one of its most valued business partners. As Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents puts it, the only time partners act this way is if they are about to split up, or if one partner is sensing a catastrophic threat to its business model.
Qualcomm's primary business model is leveraging its patents, and if the US courts continue down the path they appear to be on, SEPs will lose a lot of their bite. This type of change must appear as a bigger risk to Qualcomm than losing Apple as a partner. Because, you know, business partners may disagree, but when one partners describes the other as a total sham in court, well, they don't usually stay business partners for long.
"But Qualcomm doesn't really want Samsung to win because it's Samsung or because Apple is Apple," Mueller wrote. "Qualcomm is interested in its own ability to aggressively monetize SEPs."
So be it, Qualcomm. Also, if you are a company other than Qualcomm that can manufacture baseband chips, this development may turn into a nice holiday gift for you.
Follow this writer, Adrian Hoppel, on Facebook.
