Qualcomm Wins a Pause In Enforcement of FTC Ruling (reuters.com) 5
Qualcomm has won a partial stay against the enforcement of a sweeping antitrust ruling in a lawsuit brought by the FTC. "The company on May 21 lost in an antitrust lawsuit and has been fighting to have the ruling put on hold while it pursued an appeal," reports Reuters. "The San Diego-based company argued that letting the ruling stand could upend its talks with phone makers over chips for 5G, the next generation of wireless data networks." From the report: In the ruling issued on Friday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals put on hold the provisions of the earlier ruling that required Qualcomm to grant patent licenses to rival chip suppliers and end its practice of requiring its chip customers to sign a patent license before purchasing chips. The earlier ruling would have required Qualcomm to renegotiate all of its existing chip and patent deals, as well as make new deals conform to the requirements. The stay granted Friday puts on hold the effect of parts of the ruling while the appeals process, which could take a year or more, plays out. The company has not formally filed its appeal in the FTC lawsuit. After Qualcomm files its arguments, the appeal will take place in January.
Double dip (Score:4, Interesting)
They’re charging parts manufacturers a licensing fee to manufacture parts that use their patents, then charging the final seller a licensing fee to sell a device that uses their patents, even though those final sellers already paid for that license when they bought the part that was already licensed.
Courts have ruled that the patent holder’s right are exhausted after the first license, so Qualcomm has no right to charge an additional fee to subsequent purchasers of properly licensed parts, in much the same way that when it comes to copyrights Disney can’t demand more money if you decide to sell your used DVD. They exhausted their rights, just like Qualcomm has here
Third post? (Score:1)
Does this one show up in the comment count on the first page? The second post did not. Maybe there's a bug affecting this story?
2nd post (Score:1)
Just as the article falls off the first page. I think this is another symptom of the demise of Slashdot. Anyone else still around here who remembers the days of the Slashdot Effect, back in the early days of perpetual September.
I don't want to blame the editor or the submitter. Especially not since a couple of my own submissions have appeared recently. I don't want to blame the topic. Antitrust is important these years.
So how to make things better?
My suggested solution approaches (again):
(1) Find a viable f
Re: (Score:1)
Some kind of anti-first post hack that picked up this "2nd post" and didn't count it at first? Or am I reporting some kind of bug?
Let me clarify that I posted the "2nd post" and then refreshed the front page several times, but the comment count for this story remained at 1. Then I added the 3rd comment in reply to the first, refreshed, and it said there were 2 comments on the story. Later on, I came back to the first page and refreshed to see 3 comments.
Now I'm going to save this comment and refresh. If it
Re: (Score:2)
Still shows 3, but maybe it's just a delayed update for some kind of index? Broken as designed, and not even visible except for basically dead discussions like this story's.