Is Apple Using a Technicality to Avoid 3G License Fees?


Recommended Posts

You may not be aware, but Qualcomm holds a number of patents on modern 3G cellular technology. Any company making a 3G cell phone has to pay patent royalties to Qualcomm. Analyst Sanford Bernstein pointed out in a report this week that Apple appears to be taking advantage of a licensing loophole to avoid paying all those fees for the iPhone. The loophole is estimated to save Apple $290 million in fiscal 2009 alone.

Licensees must pay 5% of the wholesale price of a 3G device to the patent owner. Qualcomm?s website lists over 145 companies that have licensed their 3G technology. The list includes all major makers of 3G handsets. The one notable exception? Apple. One surprise on the list is Foxconn, the Taiwanese manufacturer of the iPhone.

The Bernstein report says that Qualcomm is being paid royalties not on the price Apple charges (average $590), but on the unit price Apple pays Foxconn, a mere $244. So instead of making $23.60 per iPhone, Qualcomm is only seeing $9.70. Apple is able to get away with this because the entire manufacturing process is done externally. Qualcomm seems fine with the arrangement. After all, $9.70 per iPhone is pretty good considering how they fly off the shelves.

1

2

You may not be aware, but Qualcomm holds a number of patents on modern 3G cellular technology. Any company making a 3G cell phone has to pay patent royalties to Qualcomm. Analyst Sanford Bernstein pointed out in a report this week that Apple appears to be taking advantage of a licensing loophole to avoid paying all those fees for the iPhone. The loophole is estimated to save Apple $290 million in fiscal 2009 alone.

Licensees must pay 5% of the wholesale price of a 3G device to the patent owner. Qualcomm?s website lists over 145 companies that have licensed their 3G technology. The list includes all major makers of 3G handsets. The one notable exception? Apple. One surprise on the list is Foxconn, the Taiwanese manufacturer of the iPhone.

The Bernstein report says that Qualcomm is being paid royalties not on the price Apple charges (average $590), but on the unit price Apple pays Foxconn, a mere $244. So instead of making $23.60 per iPhone, Qualcomm is only seeing $9.70. Apple is able to get away with this because the entire manufacturing process is done externally. Qualcomm seems fine with the arrangement. After all, $9.70 per iPhone is pretty good considering how they fly off the shelves.

1

2

good for them i guess

If Qualcomm doesn't care why would you?

My problem is the shady way Apple does business, and the way they rip off their customers. I am sure Qualcomm do care that they are being cheated out of millions of dollars due to a technicality but as long as US law stays the same they are pretty powerless to stop it. The simple fact is that Apple are charging their customers extortionate amounts for the devices, and not paying fairly for the use of other people's technology (hey I thought it was Microsoft that stole everyone else's ideas :laugh:)

My problem is the shady way Apple does business, and the way they rip off their customers. I am sure Qualcomm do care that they are being cheated out of millions of dollars due to a technicality but as long as US law stays the same they are pretty powerless to stop it. The simple fact is that Apple are charging their customers extortionate amounts for the devices, and not paying fairly for the use of other people's technology (hey I thought it was Microsoft that stole everyone else's ideas :laugh:)

I hope you have a reliable anti-flame shield. I heard fanboys are vicious.

Doesn't sound like a loophole to me. That just seems like the way the law is intended and written.

It's either that, or Qualcomm is double-dipping by requiring Foxcon to pay 5% for using the technology, and then Apple pays another 5% on top of that for selling it.

And then if we want to sell our second-hand phone, maybe we pay another 5% to Qualcomm?

Perhaps due to the fact that Qualcomm produces most of the components for the Iphone?

So we're ignoring the fact that almost none of the components in the iPhone are made by Qualcomm. Lets see, the parts that could be made by Qualcomm but aren't:

- Application Processssor core: ARM

- Graphics core: Imagination Tech

- SoC: Samsung (includes the two above components and many other IP cores)

- Baseband: Infineon

- Wifi/Bluetooth: Broadcom

Source: http://www.phonewreck.com/2009/06/19/iphon...n-and-analysis/

I don't see why people think this is a problem? Patent license fees are paid at the point of manufacture, not the point of sale. ALL mobile phone companies do exactly the same thing.

Do you think T-Mobile pay Qualcomm's licensing fees for the HTC phones it rebrands?

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/11/20/doe...hole-on-iphone/

Qualcomm?s patents cover key aspects of newer third-generation networks. So companies delivering 3G products pay patent royalties to the company, which are widely believed to average a little less than 5% of thwholesaleb> price of a cellphone.

Seems to makes sense since it should be the "wholesale" price, which is much cheaper than the "retail" price. If anything, they're not screwing Qualcomm, they're screwing us!

If Qualcomm doesn't care why would you?

Because Apple sux!!!

Who knows really, 3 companies come to an agreement that differs from agreements with other companies, but people don't like one of the companies involved so they make it out to be a bad thing.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Christian Maas' XVI32 is a nice (and very small) hex editor. Speaking of hex editors, many years ago a colleague and I who both worked at Tribal Voice managed to edit a copy of the company's PowWow instant messaging client to make it behave better now that all of its lookup servers and other server-side tech was gone.  The program didn't support NAT (RFC-3022 was introduced in January 2001, the same time Tribal Voice was shuttered), but it still worked okay if you manually set up port-forwarding on your router.  The server at http://powwow.jazy.net/ hosts a copy (usual warnings about downloading and running untrusted code from random internet servers apply). I occasionally use some tools like Funduc Software's Search and Replace and Application Mover when I need to make mass-edits to text-based files or move programs with a hard-coded installation directories, respectively.  When I need to figure out the exact LCD panel inside of a laptop, EnTech Taiwan's Monitor Asset Manager is my go-to tool for that purpose. JD Design's website (now hosted on github.io) has a number of interesting freeware and shareware utilities.  I used to use their TouchPro utility to set the file timestamps on software I was mastering to match its version number (e.g., version 3.00 of a program had all of its files dates set to 3:00AM, and so forth). Karenware has a number of interesting freeware utilities, too. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky  
    • I still use HexChat! Not really as ancient as the 1994 AutoCAD above my post, but I have never found anything better to replace it. Yes we still operate an IRC server https://www.neowin.net/irc/ 😛 
    • At work we still have a couple of people that use a version of AutoCAD LT purchased in 1994. This predates Windows 95 and works fine on versions of Windows up to XP. Its long since run in an locked down isolated XP VM, accessible via RDP. I did install LibreCAD for them, however they said it was just too different to get to grips with. In all fairness one of them is now 75 and the other is almost 60.
    • On my music making (non internet) PC Sony Acid Pro 7.0 Adobe Audition 2015 Korg Legacy Collection Windows 7 SP1
    • Anyway to download these versions without being on the Experimental builds?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Jeroen Wilms earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      509
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      138
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      90
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      81
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!