LONDON, Feb 17 (Reuters) – Chipmaker Qualcomm said on Tuesday a London lawsuit alleging it had abused its dominant position to force Apple and Samsung to pay inflated royalties will be withdrawn.
The British consumers’ association which goes by the name of Which? had brought the case on behalf of around 29 million people who bought iPhones or Samsung devices since 2015, seeking 480 million pounds ($652.03 million) in compensation.
Which? had argued at a trial last year that Qualcomm made Apple and Samsung pay inflated royalties even if its chips were not used in a device under a worldwide so-called no licence, no chips policy, which inflated the cost of devices.
Qualcomm, however, said the lawsuit mischaracterised its long-standing requirement for manufacturers to obtain a licence for its standard essential patents before buying chipsets.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal had yet to give a ruling following last year’s trial.
Which? said in a statement on Tuesday that it would apply to withdraw the case, having reached an agreement under which Qualcomm will make no payment to the claimant class.
It said it had concluded the tribunal would find Qualcomm did not coerce Apple or Samsung to sign any patent licences or chipset agreements, or agree to any licensing terms.
Which? also said the tribunal would find Qualcomm’s practices “did not infringe competition laws, did not result in inflated royalties, and did not lead to an increase in prices consumers paid for their mobile phones”.
A Qualcomm spokesperson said: “This recognition by the class representative, following a trial on the merits, reaffirms what the courts in the United States have repeatedly held: Qualcomm’s licensing practices are lawful and do not harm competition.”
Apple and Samsung did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
A similar consumer lawsuit against Qualcomm in California, which challenged the company’s patent licensing and exclusive-dealing chip agreements with Apple and other manufacturers, was dismissed in 2023.
($1 = 0.7362 pounds)
(Reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Catarina Demony and Emelia Sithole-Matarise)
Comments