SAN JOSE, Calif. – Qualcomm paid Apple $ 1 billion to win the wireless modem business as part of a three-year deal in 2011. Qualcomm CEO Steve Mollenkopf mentioned the astonishing number filed against the company late last Friday in a cartel case against the US Federal Trade Commission. Earlier in the day, Apple's purchasing chief described the deal as an attempt to license royalty for less than $ 10 per iPhone for Qualcomm listeners.
Judge Lucy Koh challenged Qualcomm lawyers to release the billions of dollars. Several parties in this case have asked their bank with moves to edit characters from testimonies.
"Do this for the media because I've sealed many of your license numbers," at the request of Qualcomm and third Asked Koh.
Qualcomm used his cross-examination of Mollenkopf late on Friday as an opportunity to expose parts of his case. He said that the chip maker has never cut off the supply of a handset manufacturer to enforce a patent licensing agreement, despite the testimony of a handful of OEMs to receive such threats.
"We have the right, but we do not Do it … it's a bad deal, it's not good for the customer relationship and … It's hard to be a first class supplier as we wish it to be the supply is interrupted, "said Mollenkopf.
He reported several years ago about an incident when he intervened to stop an order to stop deliveries to Sony. At that time Sony had spun off its part of the Sony Ericsson chipset company and had not left a WCDMA license.
"Our team accidentally made a stopover [order]. I was involved immediately, [telling Sony’s CEO that Qualcomm] sent the wrong signal and I will make sure that nothing happens to the chip supply. I told the [Qualcomm] team the same thing. I said that if something like that happens in the future, I want to know about it.
Regarding the 2011 iPhone deal, Apple came to us and wanted to go with us in a big way, they wanted our [baseband] chip for 100% of their iPhones, but they wanted us to pay them a billion dollars to get this opportunity [a new chip] platform, but it was not a typical amount, "he said.
The deal "worked for both parties," he said, adding that Qualcomm made a profit. A second three-year contract from 2013 had a similar structure of Qualcomm's incentive payments on a fixed schedule.
In both deals, if Apple used the baseband of another company, Qualcomm would "retrieve" some of its incentives. Towards the end of the 2013 agreement, Apple began using Intel chips. Qualcomm therefore took some incentives back, but nevertheless made a profit from the deal.
The FTC claims exclusivity is an example of Qualcomm abusing its market dominance. Mollenkopf described it differently:
"Apple had leverage because it was about a lot of volume business … we did not want to incentivize and get the volume … [Qualcomm needed to] get the volume we need for the deal," he said ,
Following the end of the agreement in 2016, Qualcomm continued to supply baseband chips for existing Apple products, but "we did not have a new store," he added.  Next page: Motorola has never seen such a high IP charge