PublishedSeptember 18, 2018

CCIA, ACT File Amicus Brief In FTC v. Qualcomm

Yesterday, CCIA and ACT filed an amicus brief in the FTC’s case against Qualcomm in the Northern District of California.  As explained in the brief, the FRAND obligation which patent owners voluntarily agree to when they participate in the development of a standard requires the owners of standard-essential patents to license their patents on “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.”  And the “non-discriminatory” portion of that obligation means precisely what it states—that the patent owner may not discriminate amongst willing licensees, but has to license anyone who wants a license.

Given Qualcomm’s historical unwillingness to license competitors, this is critically important.  By refusing to license competing chipset vendors, Qualcomm can force the customers of those chipset vendors to license Qualcomm’s patents from Qualcomm, thereby allowing Qualcomm to exert control over their competitors’ business relationships.  It also allows Qualcomm to benefit from use-based licensing, charging more money depending on the end-use of their patent—even though the relevant technology is the same in either case.  There’s no reason for a 3G patent to be more or less valuable when it’s used for the navigation system in a $100,000 car versus a $20,000 car, or when it’s used for a $100 low-end smartphone versus an $800 flagship phone.

Qualcomm’s actions threaten competition in the cellular market and thereby threaten potential innovation and American competitiveness in new areas of cellular technology like 5G.  Judge Koh should enforce the agreement Qualcomm agreed to abide by when it chose to participate in cellular standardization activities, including ensuring that they license all willing licensees.

Josh Landau

Patent Counsel, CCIA

Joshua Landau is the Patent Counsel at the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), where he represents and advises the association regarding patent issues.  Mr. Landau joined CCIA from WilmerHale in 2017, where he represented clients in patent litigation, counseling, and prosecution, including trials in both district courts and before the PTAB.

Prior to his time at WilmerHale, Mr. Landau was a Legal Fellow on Senator Al Franken’s Judiciary staff, focusing on privacy and technology issues.  Mr. Landau received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center and his B.S.E.E. from the University of Michigan.  Before law school, he spent several years as an automotive engineer, during which time he co-invented technology leading to U.S. Patent No. 6,934,140.

Follow @PatentJosh on Twitter.

More Posts

How Litigation Finance Busts the Bank of Legal Trust

The American legal system gives lawyers vast powers over private citizens. In the United States, there are no “loser pays” rules, no limits on lawyers’ ability to file complaints, and a summons ...

The Fintiv Rule Heads Back to District Court

A ruling last week by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Apple v. Vidal throws the future of the Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) controversial NHK-Fintiv rule into even greater...

As China Prioritizes Its Patent System, America Must Do the Same and More

During the 14th National People’s Congress (NPC) earlier this month in Beijing, China began outlining a series of proposals to give itself an edge over its competitors in critical technological sect...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.