Nokia Fires Latest Salvo In Patent Fight With Qualcomm

Never mind the technology, Qualcomm's real focus these days is on intellectual property. It's involved in a number of disputes with several different companies, reflecting not only its strong patent portfolio, but also widespread unease in the mobile industry with how it licenses that portfolio. Broadcom has been one legal foe of Qualcomm's, as the two companies have had several separate patent-infringement cases and allegations of antitrust violations. Following a win for Broadcom in one case earlier this year, and the settlement of another last week, the two companies have also agreed to drop two other patent suits. Even after all that, they've still got a few more suits, as well as a case at the International Trade Commission to work out, so don't feel sorry for the lawyers just yet.

A bigger potential problem for Qualcomm, though, is its ongoing spat with Nokia. The big issue here is the expiration next month of a Nokia licensing deal for some of Qualcomm's CDMA technology, which it needs to sell 3G and some other types of handsets. For Qualcomm, there's a significant amount of royalty revenue at stake, and it also has some patents it licenses from Nokia that are relevant to some of its chips tied up in the deal. In reality, neither company can let the deal expire -- but they have vastly different ideas of how much it should cost Nokia to license the Qualcomm patents. Against this backdrop has come a litany of antitrust complaints about Qualcomm's licensing practices and patent lawsuits, all of which are little more than bargaining chips.

Now, Nokia has made its latest move by filing two more suits in Europe against Qualcomm, asking courts in Germany and the Netherlands to rule its patents "exhausted" in the EU, with relation to products sold there under a Qualcomm licenses. What it boils down to is that Nokia is using chips from Texas Instruments, which has the relevant licenses from Qualcomm for the intellectual property in question. It's asking the courts to rule that because TI has those licenses, it doesn't need to have them (and pay Qualcomm for them) as well. Such a ruling would significantly undermine Qualcomm's bargaining position, but it seems like little more than a preemptive strike against a Qualcomm suit for patent infringement against Nokia soon after the licensing deal expires.

Despite all this activity, things are really just getting started, particularly in the spat with Nokia. But given the way things have gone in the Broadcom cases, as well as the recent indefinite stay ordered by an ITC judge in a patent case with Nokia (which itself came after Qualcomm withdrew three of its six patents from the case), it would appear things may not be going Qualcomm's way. If that is the case, coupled with an industry that's tired of paying the company royalties, it looks like Qualcomm could be in for a bumpy ride.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    alaric, 19 Mar 2007 @ 11:21am

    How about some balance? What about GSM IPR?

    GSM IPR holders are every bit as bad as qualcomm. You just don't hear the complaints because the parties that get the short end of the stick are generally chinese and korean.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous, 19 Mar 2007 @ 11:21am

    GSM IPR

    GSM IPR holders are, as you point out, a fairly closed group, from which the Koreans and the Chinese are excluded. However, no single GSM player collects the percentage or magnitude of royalties that Qualcomm does. A big number. A big difference.

    link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Alaric, 19 Mar 2007 @ 11:21am

    RE:GSM IPR

    "GSM IPR holders are, as you point out, a fairly closed group, from which the Koreans and the Chinese are excluded. However, no single GSM player collects the percentage or magnitude of royalties that Qualcomm does. A big number. A big difference." This is actually wrong on several levels. GSM IPR holders charge more on a percentage basis than qualcomm, a lot more. Most claims in the Korean press allege its on the order of 15% to 25% which vastly surpasses Qualcomm's roughly 5% fees. The difference is that the GSM market is dominated by GSM IPR holders (gee i wonder why?) so most firms (nokia, alcatel, siemens, ericsson, sony-ericsson, motorola) don't actually pay them. I'm not trying to defend Qualcomm. They're abusing the IPR stance as well but abuse is not limited to qualcomm. GSM IPR has long been used as a vehicle to keep asian producers out.

    link to this | view in thread ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.