UK Consumer Watchdog Sues Qualcomm for Allegedly Breaching Competition Law

Around 29 million Britons who own an Apple or Samsung phone could be entitled to a collective £480m payout if a landmark legal claim against U.S. chipmaker Qualcomm is successful.

qualcomm iphone 7
Consumer watchdog Which? is suing the chipmaker for allegedly breaching U.K. competition law by taking advantage of its dominance in the patent licensing and chip markets.

As reported by the BBC, Which? alleges that Qualcomm charged Apple and Samsung inflated fees that were then passed on to consumers in the form of higher smartphone prices.

Which? is seeking up to £30 each in damages for about 29 million people in the U.K. who own Apple or Samsung smartphones that have been purchased since October 1, 2015. For Apple smartphone owners, that would include iPhone 6s and 6s Plus and newer devices. The watchdog has filed its legal claim with the Competition Appeal Tribunal, which will ultimately decide if it can go ahead.

"We believe Qualcomm's practices are anti-competitive and have so far taken around £480m from consumers' pockets," said Anabel Hoult, CEO of Which? "This needs to stop. We are sending a clear warning that if companies like Qualcomm indulge in manipulative practices which harm consumers, Which? is prepared to take action."

Responding to the case, Qualcomm said it had "no basis."

"As the plaintiffs are well aware, their claims were effectively put to rest last summer by a unanimous panel of judges at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States," a spokesman told the BBC.

This is by no means the first time that Qualcomm has been accused of anticompetitive behavior. In 2018, Qualcomm was hit with a 997 million euro ($1.2 billion) fine by EU antitrust regulators for paying Apple to use its LTE chips in iOS devices.

According to the European Commission's investigation, the payments to Apple occurred from 2011 to 2016, and were made with the sole aim of blocking Qualcomm's LTE chipset market rivals, such as Intel.

In 2019, an antitrust lawsuit, brought against Qualcomm by the Federal Trade Commission, concluded that Qualcomm's "no license, no chips" model that allowed it to refuse to provide chips to companies without a patent license, violated federal antitrust laws, and required Qualcomm to renegotiate all of its licensing terms with customers in good faith.

However, in August 2020, Qualcomm won an appeal that prevented the San Diego company from having to renegotiate its licensing agreements with smartphone makers.

Popular Stories

New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 18

20 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 18.2

Monday December 16, 2024 8:55 am PST by
Apple released iOS 18.2 in the second week of December, bringing the second round of Apple Intelligence features to iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 models. This update brings several major advancements to Apple's AI integration, including completely new image generation tools and a range of Visual Intelligence-based enhancements. Apple has added a handful of new non-AI related feature controls as...
iPhone 17 Slim Feature Single Camera 2 Redux

Top 5 Apple Products to Look Forward to in 2025

Friday December 20, 2024 2:22 pm PST by
It's looking like 2025 is going to be an important year for Apple, with the company planning to revamp the iPhone, push further into smart home products, and improve Apple Intelligence. There are tons of new products rumored for 2025, including new iPhones, M4 Macs, a smart home command center, and much more. We've highlighted the top five Apple products that will have the biggest impact in...
iphone 16 apple intelligence

Apple Drops Plans for iPhone Hardware Subscription Service

Wednesday December 18, 2024 11:39 am PST by
Apple is no longer planning to launch a hardware subscription service that would let customers "subscribe" to get a new iPhone each year, reports Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. Gurman first shared rumors about Apple's work on a hardware subscription service back in 2022, and at the time, he said that Apple wanted to develop a simple system that would allow customers to pay a monthly fee to gain...
mac pro creativity

Apple Launched the Controversial 'Trashcan' Mac Pro 11 Years Ago Today

Thursday December 19, 2024 7:00 pm PST by
Apple launched the controversial "trashcan" Mac Pro eleven years ago today, introducing one of its most criticized designs that persisted through a period of widespread discontentment with the Mac lineup. The redesign took the Mac Pro in an entirely new direction, spearheaded by a polished aluminum cylindrical design that became unofficially dubbed the "trashcan" in the Mac community. All of ...
blackmagic vision pro

Blackmagic Debuts $30K 3D Camera for Capturing Video for Vision Pro

Monday December 16, 2024 4:17 pm PST by
Blackmagic today announced that its URSA Cine Immersive camera is now available for pre-order, with deliveries set to start late in the first quarter of 2025. Blackmagic says that this is the world's first commercial camera system designed to capture 3D content for the Vision Pro. The URSA Cine Immersive camera was first introduced in June, but it has not been available for purchase until...
apple tv 4k yellow bg feature

New Apple TV Rumored to Launch Next Year With These Features

Tuesday December 17, 2024 9:02 am PST by
The current Apple TV 4K was released more than two years ago, so the streaming device is becoming due for a hardware upgrade soon. Fortunately, it was recently rumored that a new Apple TV will launch at some point next year. Below, we recap rumors about the next-generation Apple TV. Bloomberg's Mark Gurman last week reported that Apple has been working on its own combined Wi-Fi and...
iPhone 17 Pro Dual Tone Feature 1

iPhone 17 Pro Rumored to Stick With 'Triangular' Camera Design

Wednesday December 18, 2024 2:36 am PST by
Contrary to recent reports, the iPhone 17 Pro will not feature a horizontal camera layout, according to the leaker known as "Instant Digital." In a new post on Weibo, the leaker said that a source has confirmed that while the appearance of the back of the iPhone 17 Pro has indeed changed, the layout of the three cameras is "still triangular," rather than the "horizontal bar spread on the...
elevation lab airtag battery

Your AirTag's Battery Will Last for Up to 10 Years With Elevation Lab's New TimeCapsule Enclosure

Wednesday December 18, 2024 10:05 am PST by
Elevation Lab today announced the launch of TimeCapsule, an innovative and simple solution for increasing the battery life of Apple's AirTag. Priced at $20, TimeCapsule is an AirTag enclosure that houses two AA batteries that offer 14x more battery capacity than the CR2032 battery that the AirTag runs on. It works by attaching the AirTag's upper housing to the built-in custom contact in the...

Top Rated Comments

Quu Avatar
50 months ago
This is the same behaviour Intel engaged in during the early to late 2000's where they were paying Dell, HP and others to not use AMD processors in their computers. Qualcomm paid Apple rebates to not use Intel modems.

Intel lost that case, Qualcomm should similarly lose this one by using that earlier case as precedent.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Radeon85 Avatar
50 months ago
So do we get multiple payouts if we bought devices every year since 2015?, bet we don't.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
techwhiz Avatar
50 months ago

Can’t blame apple (or any other company) for wanting to mitigate the fees based on selling price for the same chip.
Here is the fee schedule link: https://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/files/qualcomm-5g-nr-royalty-terms-statement.pdf

* An effective running royalty rate of 2.275% of the selling price of branded single-mode 5G handsets; and
* An effective running royalty rate of 3.25% of the selling price of branded multi-mode (3G/4G/5G) handsets.

They charge different rates on the features and modes of the device.
It's not secret and you have a choice. The choice is don't use their technology.
They sell chips and the license is separate from the cost of the device.
So it's two parts; cost of chip and cost license (device).
Since I work in the chip industry it makes perfect sense to me. The cost of manufacturing the silicon is one cost.
The cost of the license is another.
People will say it's "double dipping".
Okay so they raise the cost of the device and everyone pays the higher price. (Apple and everyone pays one price).
They then charge a license of others just using the patents.
They make the same money, if not more, and the emerging country suffers because the cost of the low end handset just went up.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ksec Avatar
50 months ago

This is the same behaviour Intel engaged in during the early to late 2000's where they were paying Dell, HP and others to not use AMD processors in their computers. Qualcomm paid Apple rebates to not use Intel modems.

Intel lost that case, Qualcomm should similarly lose this one by using that earlier case as precedent.
That is absolutely false. People will need to understand one thing.

Your Love of Apple, or any entity replacing Apple, does not automatically made that entity's rival or enemy evil. So please stop making these claims.

First, Intel *did* pay the major vendors not to use AMD. Or to be more precise Intel will stop the rebate to vendor if they were selling AMD. Either way this was ruled as anticompetitive and illegal.

Second Qualcomm did *not* force Apple to buy their chip. Qualcomm did however force Apple not sell a WiMAX iPhone. ( WiMax being very similar to TD-LTE that is currently deployed and used by Sprint in the US ). Again *force* may not be the correct term. Qualcomm will refuse to sell you a Modem if you sell a WiMax iPhone. This isn't strictly illegal, since you can still buy 3G/4G Modem from others.

It is not clear right now what the claims the consumer watchdog are suing Qualcomm in UK. But the idea of No License No Chips has stood the test of court. Again, no one force you to buy Qualcomm Modem, you can make one yourself which is what Samsung, Huawei are doing. As well as Mediatek selling SoC with Modem, all three combined representing 50%+ of Worldwide market and *increasing*. Should Apple make their own Modem, along with possibly BBK buying or licensing Modem IP from Huawei, You are looking at Qualcomm having less than 30% of the Modem / SoC Market to play with. Hardly a monopoly by anyone's or any court's definition.

One could argue whether Qualcomm's patent licensing fee are too expensive and not FRAND. That is up for debate, the Apple's PR speak of Qualcomm's patent fee charging more than Double of the next 6 companies combined have been shown in court as a spin ( I would even call it a lie ) rather than absolute truth. So should you decide to argue for that my suggestion is that one should be well versed in the situation or ask questions instead of jumping to conclusion. That is of course, unless you are an Apple apologist.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
techwhiz Avatar
50 months ago

Qualcomm should focus on making the best CPU's, then they wouldn't have to charge others for not using them. But, it was strange that Qualcomm can charge phone makers for patents, when the phone maker is not using any Qualcomm chips, like they did with Apple.
When Intel made modems Apple paid the licensing fee that is required when the technology is put into a phone.
Intel used patents from Qualcomm to develop the modem.
The licensing fees are based on handset price.
The handset price and features are used as the basis for the license so expensive phones (Samsung, Apple, etc.) subsidize technology for emerging markets.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Nuno Lopes Avatar
50 months ago
This is similar to what Apple does in the App Store while not collecting 30% of the sale but much much less. Heck Apple accepted the payments. I wonder why Qualcomm had to pay to secure Apple has a client in the first place ... right I remember Apple suing Qualcomm before ... ehehehehe. I wonder if Google is next, by paying Apple billions to be the default search engine ... hence keeping competition out.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)