Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Jan 2018 14:34 UTC
Legal

The European Commission has fined Qualcomm €997m for abusing its market dominance in LTE baseband chipsets. Qualcomm prevented rivals from competing in the market by making significant payments to a key customer on condition it would not buy from rivals. This is illegal under EU antitrust rules.

Qualcomm sounds like an upstanding company. Of course, they are appealing the decision.

Order by: Score:
Scum
by jonsmirl on Wed 24th Jan 2018 15:17 UTC
jonsmirl
Member since:
2005-07-06

Qualcomm is scum and manipulating the patent system to extract unjustified royalties. It is sickening that gatekeeper patents can be used to extract tens of billions in royalties.

What is a gatekeeper patent? The poster child for a gatekeeper patent is the Microsoft FAT32 patent. That was about three hours of work that has resulted in $20B in royalties being paid. That patent allows a useless piece of technology to control access to Windows compatibility.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Scum
by Drumhellar on Wed 24th Jan 2018 19:26 UTC in reply to "Scum"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

What is a gatekeeper patent? The poster child for a gatekeeper patent is the Microsoft FAT32 patent. That was about three hours of work that has resulted in $20B in royalties being paid. That patent allows a useless piece of technology to control access to Windows compatibility.


You're getting your patents confused - the FAT32 patent was only ever leveraged against TomTom. The Linux VFAT driver was quickly changed to avoid the patent (Which was for storing short and long filenames together)

The patents that Microsoft receives money from from Android vendors is on the exFAT driver, and that is because exFAT support is required for SDXC support, and is only one of the technologies you're licensing with that $5-$15 licensing fee for SDXC

While I disagree with software patents in principle, the patents for exFAT at least are significantly more complex than the simple "gatekeeper" patent situation you described.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Scum
by Kochise on Wed 24th Jan 2018 19:30 UTC in reply to "Scum"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Quite fun considering the EU agreed to allow Quallcomm to buy NXP, helping them to become into another "dominant market position".

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Scum
by kwan_e on Wed 24th Jan 2018 21:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Scum"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Quite fun considering the EU agreed to allow Quallcomm to buy NXP, helping them to become into another "dominant market position".


If they blocked them, they would have been accused of interfering with the market and blah blah blah monopolies aren't bad blah blah blah Brussels blah.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Scum
by Alfman on Wed 24th Jan 2018 22:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Scum"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

kwan_e,

If they blocked them, they would have been accused of interfering with the market and blah blah blah monopolies aren't bad blah blah blah Brussels blah.


You should write more posts in this style, haha. I don't know why, but it makes me laugh.

Reply Score: 2

v Brillant
by Macka on Thu 25th Jan 2018 00:41 UTC
RE: Brillant
by Soulbender on Thu 25th Jan 2018 03:28 UTC in reply to "Brillant"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Why do Americans always think it's about them?

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Brillant
by The123king on Fri 26th Jan 2018 14:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Brillant"
The123king Member since:
2009-05-28

It's their god-given right

Reply Score: 0

RE: Brillant
by nej_simon on Fri 26th Jan 2018 15:04 UTC in reply to "Brillant"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Now let's target more American tech companies.


Remeber when Volkswagen were fined bilions of dollars in the US due to cheating on emission tests? And forced to recall thousands of cars at the cost of additional billions of dollars.

If you violate the rules of a markete were you are active authorities will come after you. It's as simple as that.

Reply Score: 3

v RE[2]: Brillant
by Kochise on Fri 26th Jan 2018 16:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Brillant"
RE[3]: Brillant
by RobG on Sun 28th Jan 2018 17:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Brillant"
RobG Member since:
2012-10-17
RE[4]: Brillant
by Gargyle on Mon 29th Jan 2018 13:28 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Brillant"
Gargyle Member since:
2015-03-27

Although the two things nej_simon mentions aren't related, they are both a display of the unjustice that riddles Europe when it comes to big corps breaking the law:

1. VWAG should have been fined instead of just having given two years to implement a fix, which equates to a VERY gentle slap on the hands when you look at what they actually and wilfully did wrong.

2. The EURO 6 emissions standard enforcement has been whittled down to give car manufacturers the chance to violate that emissions standard wich a much forgiving factor without having to fear repercussions, thus granting them the legal right to continue poisoning the air in Europe.

Reply Score: 1