قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Technology / Qualcomm attempt to use Intel as hypocrite backfires in a cartel case

Qualcomm attempt to use Intel as hypocrite backfires in a cartel case



(Bloomberg) – Lawyers from Qualcomm Inc. saw in a state antitrust lawsuit against the chipmaker the chance to score a few points by using an example from competitor Intel Corp. as a company accused of abusing its dominance of an industry. They were wrong.

According to a survey by Intel's senior strategic officer, who had largely backfired this week, a Qualcomm lawyer rejected a judge's invitation on Friday to return Aicha Evans to the stand as a jury-initiated trial by the Federal Trade Commission bring to the fourth day of the testimony.

"Not ours, your honor," said Qualcomm lawyer Antony Ryan to US District Judge Lucy Koh. Evans cheered, whereupon in the courtroom in San Jose, California, a wide laughter triggered one of the liveliest showdowns in this case. It also ended up a torture for him.

Steve Mollenkopf, Chief Executive Officer of Qualcomm's late-Friday comment, was firmer, with reference to the shipping practice that involved paying royalties and reviewing the ethos of the San Diego Cross. resident company. No fireworks, cheers or laughter followed.

Evans, who previously led Intel's mobile phone chip unit, repeatedly turned to Ryan's questions to reiterate her company's belief that Qualcomm was unjustly using technology licensing and its leadership in smartphone components to eliminate competition.

Qualcomm Sees FTC Trial Against Smartphone Dominance

Ryan often tried to corner Evans by citing clippings from their emails and tentative statements, a common tactic to save time. Evans had no idea that she claimed her right to read aloud documents in their entirety, while the existence of the context was crucial. When Ryan tried to interrupt her, she ignored him and kept reading.

Evans was born in Senegal and brought her into a very unusual category in the chip industry: a black female executive. Her mission at Intel was to gain market share in mobile phones to try to achieve the company's dominant position in the PC industry.

Ryan, Mr. Ryan, you go very fast. Easy, "she once told the lawyer. Earlier, she said, "I'm a French speaker, the numbers are tough. I would like to ask you to slow down, please. "

Intel, the world's second-largest chipmaker, holds around 90 percent of the lucrative market for computer server chips, with more than 80 percent of PC processors." The only remaining competitor, Advanced Micro Devices Inc., once blamed Intel in a lawsuit to use its control of this market to force PC makers to be exclusive users of its products $ 1 billion in 2009.

Qualcomm has set another setback before the FTC antitrust case [19659012] Evans claimed that Qualcomm had barred Intel from contracts with Apple Inc. by binding the iPhone maker in exclusive agreements

and telling us that we had a chance in 2016, but in 2014 we had one due to one Existing agreement that Apple had met with Qualcomm lost, "she said." We were two years back

Mollenkopf has argued that the government has no evidence that its "no license, no chips" policy has affected competition in the industry. Qualcomm claims Intel's current status as Apple's exclusive chip provider proves that the industry is actually healthy.

Evans supplemented Qualcomm, but took another dig at the company that will appeal to FTC lawyers.

"They are excellent technical engineers," she said. "That does not give them the God-given right to conduct unfair business practices."

Friday's session ended with Mollenkopf's statement, in which both sides tried to move forward with their central arguments. Like other Qualcomm representatives, the CEO confirmed that the company does not provide chips to phone manufacturers that do not pay royalties. Their argument is that these royalties flow into technology development, which benefits the entire industry, not just Qualcomm.

The government's attorneys sought to support their case that Qualcomm used its position in the marketplace to gain high patent licensing fees and force customers to remain exclusive to them.

Qualcomm disagreed that its business model is a byproduct of market development and is not part of a grand concept designed to disadvantage potential competitors – its technology leadership has propelled its patents and chips to the forefront of the industry, and supply arrangements have been driven by supply and demand ,

The chipmaker is unique in the industry as it receives most of its profits through licensing patents, all of which support modern phone systems. Mobile phone manufacturers pay a percentage of the price of a phone, regardless of whether they use their chips or not.

The matter is the Federal Trade Commission against Qualcomm Inc., 17-cv-00220, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).

(Updates with Mollenkopf's statement begin in the fourth paragraph.)

To contact the reporters on this story: Ian King in San Francisco at [email protected]; Kartikay Mehrotra in San Francisco at kmehrotra2 @ bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Elizabeth Wollman at [email protected]; Jillian Ward at [email protected], Peter Blumberg

For more articles of this type, visit bloomberg.com

© 2019 Bloomberg LP


Source link