FTC vs. Qualcomm: Qualcomm wins the antitrust case, completely and decisively

After pointlessly fighting tooth and nail for almost two years, FTC will now be forced to end the case,
after the latest setback at The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Ninth Circuit). The Ninth Circuit’s well expected en banc denial, following a series of upsets, put the death nail in the coffin. After the direct, clear, and very short seven-line opinion, I am certain that FTC will not even imagine knocking on the doors of the U.S. Supreme Court.

This decision clears all the clouds hovering around Qualcomm-the country’s 5G crown jewel. This will also have a long-lasting impact not only on its licensing business and policies but also on the technology
industry and innovations as a whole.

Side note: If you would like to know the full background of the case, follow this FTC vs. Qualcomm article series.

A wave of setbacks for the FTC

After some initial success at the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (US District Court), FTC has constantly seen setbacks, and at times, very harsh rebukes at the Ninth Circuit.

First, the three-judge panel unanimously accepted Qualcomm’s request for the stay, with a ruling that almost ridiculed the US District Court’s decision. The panel opined it as “…a trailblazing application of
the antitrust laws or … an improper excursion beyond the outer limits of the Sherman Act…”

Second, when another three-judge appeals panel heard the case, its questioning and doubting FTC’s confusing arguments made it amply clear which way the panel was leaning.

Third, the actual unanimous judgment almost shredded the US District Court’s decision and completely reversed it and threw it out, including the initial summary judgment. The opinion written by Judge Callahan was a tell-a-tale of how US District Court Judge, Lucy Koh miss-applied the antitrust laws.

Finally, this wholesome denial of the en banc request was yet another strong strike against FTC’s unfounded fascination in continuing the unworthy prosecution of a free and very successful American
enterprise. It indeed quashed the hopes of some who thought the surprise move of FTC Chairman Joseph J. Simons, a Trump appointee, to authorize the en banc request had brought life back into the
case.

In retrospect, the case has gone through a whole slew of US Federal judges-six judges of the panels, to some extent the full Ninth Circuit bench of more than 25 judges. But the only sympathizer for FTC, from
the US legal system, seems to be Judge Lucy Koh of the US District Court. As an observer who attended almost all the court hearings, I found her handling of the case to be bizarre. Some of the examples of her strange behavior include: artificially limiting the discovery period which skewed the case, clinging on to the hypotheses such as “tax on the competitor,” which were rejected by other courts and judges,
rejecting the testimonies of all of Qualcomm’s executives, including that of its highly respected and revered founder, and an industry veteran, Dr. Irwin Jacobs.

A series of unfortunate events

As I have indicated many times in my earlier articles, this case had a lot of oddities right from the beginning and they continued throughout the proceedings. The case was filed in the last days of the
previous administration, with only partial commission present. The sitting FTC commissioner publicly criticized the case by writing a harsh rebuke on The Wall Street Journal. When the full commission was
constituted, the Chairman recused from the case, making the decision a tie with two commissioners supporting and the other two opposing. That made the case almost run on autopilot, managed by the FTC staff. Apple, which was one of the alleged instigators and a major witness in the case, settled with
Qualcomm and ended its active support.

Many U.S. Government agencies opposed FTC’s action. The U.S. Department of Justice, which shares the responsibility and partners with FTC on antitrust matters, vehemently opposed the case and even took the unprecedented step of testifying against it at the appeals hearing. Many legal scholars and previous FTC commissioners, Ninth Circuit judges, opined against the case.

What’s next?

Although FTC has a theoretical option of knocking on the door of the US Supreme Court, I don’t think these series of setbacks and strong rebukes leave it any option other than to close the case and move on. If the appeals decision was not unanimous, not a complete reversal, or the en banc was accepted,
there was some justification. Without any of those, it would be utterly stupid for FTC to continue the case and waste even more taxpayer money.

If they had any doubts, the Ninth Circuit’s en banc unambiguous opinion, which is mere seven lines long makes it pretty clear. That is the shortest court document that I have ever seen and analyzed. Many go
up to a hundred pages or more.

This decision for sure clears all the doubts around Qualcomm’s licensing policies and the industry- standard practice of licensing to OEMs. That means the practice of calculating licensing fees based on the price of the device (with caps, of course) is completely valid and legal. The case establishes a pretty significant precedence for licensing practices and applicability of antitrust
laws. It will have a long-lasting impact on not only the cellular but almost the entire technology industry and beyond. With 5G set to transform almost every industry on the planet, the repercussions of the case are impossible to overstate. Look for a detailed article on this from me soon.

Meanwhile, for more articles like this, and up-to-date analysis of the latest mobile and tech industry news, sign-up for our monthly newsletter at TantraAnalyst.com/Newsletter, or listen to our Tantra’s
Mantra podcast.

Originally published at https://www.rcrwireless.com on October 29, 2020.

Related Posts

FTC vs. Qualcomm-FTC Chairman authorizes another swing at Qualcomm (Analyst Angle)

FTC vs. Qualcomm-More than meets the eye in Ninth Circuit decision

FTC vs. Qualcomm: What do skeptical appeals panel, defiant defendants, and dwindling arguments…

FTC vs. Qualcomm — The meaning and relevance of FRAND commitment

FTC vs. Qualcomm-FTC’s changed tactic undermines its confidence in the case (Analyst Angle)

FTC vs. Qualcomm — Support pours in for Qualcomm from all sides in its appeals process

FTC vs. Qualcomm: Finally saner senses prevail with the appellate court’s decision

Why FTC vs. Qualcomm ruling is not just about a company but about the country!

The fate of FTC’s case after Qualcomm’s settlement with Apple

FTC vs. Qualcomm: A proxy for China vs. the USA?

FTC vs. Qualcomm: Is this what the war on innovation looks like?

The chronicles of 3GPP Rel. 17: Part 1-Sowing the seeds

Chronicles of 3GPP Rel. 17 Part 2: Defining the future of 5G

Demystifying cellular patents and licensing Part 1: How cellular standards are created

Demystifying cellular patents and licensing Part 2: Patents are a monetization tool for innovators

Demystifying cellular patents and licensing Part 3: All patents are not created equal (Analyst…

When it comes to patents, quality always beats quantity: Demystifying cellular patents and…

Made for each other’-Why integrated modem-RF system approach is a must for 5G device supremacy…

The inside story of 3GPP-Who are the unsung heroes that create the standards?

Would you pay $1.41 for 15 minutes of your iPhone battery-life?

Another day, another Apple vs. Qualcomm trial

5G FWA Broadband: A Better Option For Urbanites, Increased Access For Ruralites

Apple Will Be Hard-Pressed to Build a Rock Star 5G Modem

Always-On, Always-Connected PCs Are Redefining Personal Computing

5G Vendors Step on the Gas at MWC

5G at Mobile World Congress: Critical milestones achieved, more to come (Analyst Angle)

Are you skeptical about 5G millimeter wave?

What Is The Killer Use Case For 5G?

Living On The Wireless Edge With AI And 5G

How Photorealistic VR And 5G May Change The Future Of Media

With Snapdragon 8cx, ARM processors graduate to performance computing, challenging the dominance…

Analyst Angle: Confused about which version of 3GPP R15 will be used for commercialization of 5G?

Analyst Angle: Did Intel’s failure to deliver on XMM 8060 make Apple delay iPhone 5G?

Is Millimeter Wave Just Another Band for 5G?

Surface Pro X-Excellent productivity notebook heralding a new era in laptops (Analyst Angle)

Wondering whether all of those 5G performance claims are true-Now we have conclusive proof!

My verdict after extensively testing Sprint in Chicago-It’s a 5G network that delivers

Why I Bought a Galaxy S10 5G

Qualcomm: the Future of 5G Flows on its Innovations

Are you skeptical about 5G millimeter wave?

What Is The Killer Use Case For 5G?

Is Millimeter Wave Just Another Band for 5G?

Tech Industry Analyst, Forbes Contributor, EETimes & RCR Wireless writer, covering 5G, AI, IoT, Wi-Fi and everything wireless. Founder www.TantraAnalyst.com

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store