dddd
PublishedJuly 19, 2019

EU Competition Authorities Fine Qualcomm While DoJ Says “No Problem”

Yesterday, EU Commissioner for Competition Margarete Vestager announced the Commission’s decision to fine Qualcomm for using pricing and contract terms to force a rival out of the market.  This fine follows another EU fine issued last year for Qualcomm’s use of exclusivity payments to avoid competition.

If that sounds familiar, it’s because earlier this year, Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California found that Qualcomm had violated U.S. antitrust laws—in part, because of its use of exclusivity payments and contract terms to harm rivals.

There is one competition regulator who’s out of step with the global consensus on Qualcomm’s anti-competitive conduct.  That’s the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust division—led by Makan Delrahim, who formerly lobbied for Qualcomm.  As a result, the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee Antitrust Subcommittee, Rep. David Cicilline, has raised questions about Delrahim’s participation in Qualcomm matters and the ‘neat mapping’ of Delrahim’s publicly stated views to the DOJ’s position in the Qualcomm case.

In a completely unprecedented move, DOJ has filed statements in the FTC’s case arguing against the FTC’s claims that Qualcomm has violated antitrust law.  (DOJ’s attempts to interfere with the FTC’s case are not only unprecedented, but also ignore prevailing case law.)

The DOJ filings in the FTC’s case have put DOJ at odds not just with the U.S. FTC and the EU competition authorities, but with much of the rest of the world—Korea, China, and Taiwan have all fined Qualcomm.  Historically, U.S. antitrust regulators have been seen as leaders.  The DOJ’s position on standard-essential patents attempts to give a pass to behavior broadly understood to be anti-competitive, risking the U.S.’s leadership role.

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

The Judicial Conference Takes on “Judge Shopping”

On March 12th, the U.S. Judicial Conference announced policy recommendations aimed at putting an end to “judge shopping,” the much-exploited practice by which litigants choose the judges who hear ...

Guest Post: Time to Shine Light on Dark Third-Party Litigation Funding

This post, written by Jerry Theodorou, initially appeared in the R Street’s Real Solutions Blog A pitched battle between proponents and opponents of third-party litigation financing (TPLF) has en...

Another Litigation Funding Dispute

In what has become a recurring topic on Patent Progress, another dispute between a patent troll and a litigation funder has emerged. This time, it is between the Irish NPE, Arigna Technology; its law ...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.