The 14-month-long Qualcomm Anti-Monopoly ticket finally landed, Qualcomm 认罚 6.088 billion yuan

Absrtact: The 14-month-long Qualcomm Anti-Monopoly ticket finally landed, Qualcomm 认罚 6.088 billion yuan. The reform will be carried out in coordination with the NDRC, and the mode of calculating the royalty rate will be changed. To this, domestic handset manufacturers Huawei, ZTE and other response said Huan

The 14-month-long Qualcomm Anti-Monopoly ticket finally landed, Qualcomm 认罚 6.088 billion yuan. The reform will be carried out in coordination with the NDRC, and the mode of calculating the royalty rate will be changed. In response, domestic handset manufacturers Huawei, ZTE and other responses said, "Welcome" the decision of the NDRC. Millet said, "no comment."

"Short-term rival machine manufacturers have little impact."

Yesterday, Huawei's official response said it had taken note of the NDRC's decision to order rectification and penalties for a monopoly on the abuse of market dominance by Qualcomm, which restricts competition. Huawei welcomes this decision, and believes that the domestic companies engaged in the production and sales of communications products and the vast number of consumers will benefit. At the same time, NDRC's decision also contributed to the improvement of intellectual property protection in the communications industry, creating a fair and competitive environment for innovation and promoting the initiative of domestic enterprises to develop and innovate. ”

ZTE also issued a statement saying "Welcome". ZTE said it welcomed the decision made by the NDRC on Qualcomm. This decision will have a far-reaching impact on the development of the global communications industry, and will have a positive effect on the benign development of intellectual property in China and the creation of a fair and competitive environment. ZTE insists on the development of more than 10% of sales revenue each year and attaches great importance to the patent protection of innovation technology.

However, the reporter contacted the millet company, Millet said, the matter "no comment." The reporter also contacted Lenovo company, to the deadline, Lenovo did not respond to the matter.

Yanhui, secretary general of China's mobile industry Alliance, told reporters that the short-term look at rival machine manufacturers have no significant impact, but the future of mobile phone patent disputes will be significantly increased.

Millet is the most impacted

Yanhui said the overhaul would have far-reaching implications for China's mobile phone industry. Because the number of patents owned by Chinese handset manufacturers is different, even the gap is huge, Qualcomm's "Do not bundle, not mandatory cross licensing" measures will change the Chinese mobile phone industry competition pattern.

Under the "Authorization Agreement", for example, a mobile phone company that used a Qualcomm chip in the past must authorize the patent to Qualcomm and not use the patent to levy royalties on any of the clients of Qualcomm. Even if some handset makers use a patent from another manufacturer, they will not have to worry about the licensing and charging of other companies as long as they buy Qualcomm's chips. This is tantamount to some of the lack of patent phone manufacturers a "umbrella", the handset manufacturers in the product development process, do not have to make a corresponding evasion of patent issues.

Qualcomm's antitrust case has not yet been adjudicated before, there have been media disclosures, ZTE issued a patent litigation letter to Millet. Yanhui said there would be a significant increase in patent lawsuits between Chinese handset makers in the future. "ZTE and Huawei have been facing a lot of patent lawsuits overseas every year, and two companies have established a sound intellectual property system, and since last year, patents have become a revenue-generating point for Huawei," he said. Since last year, ZTE and Huawei have done a lot of preparatory work for patent lawsuits, not excluding future patent lawsuits against Chinese mobile phone companies. ”

Data show that as of November 2014, Huawei received nearly 30,000 patents. By the end of 2013, ZTE had more than 52,000 patents worldwide, and the cumulative number of patents had exceeded 16,000. In this number, Millet invention licensing only 10, Oppo has 103.

Therefore, there are mobile phone industry personage said, regardless of millet sign not to sign Qualcomm's "Authorization Agreement", Millet is more than Huawei, ZTE more expenses royalties. The difference is whether royalties are given to Qualcomm or to other handset makers. "Future ZTE, Huawei, Lenovo are likely to sue Millet, but the battlefield is not necessarily at home, but like Ericsson to choose abroad." Because the cost of domestic litigation is too high. ”

Analysis

High-throughput business model unchanged?

In addition to fines, whether the most core business model of Qualcomm changes, how much the handset maker will be affected is the focus of the antitrust. Yesterday, a number of mobile phone industry insiders said that Qualcomm's original business model has indeed made some adjustments, the abolition of some mandatory unreasonable parts, but the overall framework has not changed.

One expert, who declined to be named, said the penalties for Qualcomm were certainly limited and that there was no radical change to the Qualcomm patent-charging model, which differed greatly from the ideal effect.

In the past, domestic handset manufacturers every shipment of a smartphone, in addition to the payment of Qualcomm chip costs, but also in accordance with the price of the whole machine to pay a certain proportion of the patent licensing costs to Qualcomm. The biggest change in the patent charging mode is the adjustment of the whole machine billing and the separation of the patent combination collection mode, such as 3G and 4G the necessary Chinese patent license and other patent license separately. But the "Qualcomm model" is basically a continuation.

According to the NDRC's rectification requirements for Qualcomm, Qualcomm needs to make adjustments in the following areas. Including China's necessary patents related to 3G and 4G technology, Qualcomm's patent license, which will be separate from other patents, will provide a list of patents to Chinese companies buying Qualcomm-patented products, no longer license fees for expired patents, and no longer require Chinese handset-makers to give their patents a free reverse license; No longer tying the necessary patents for non-wireless communication standards; For mobile phones sold in China, the total price of the whole machine will be replaced by a patent fee of 65% for the whole machine. Sales baseband chips no longer require all unreasonable agreements to be signed.

This means that Qualcomm's patent license is unchanged in accordance with the device pricing model: Qualcomm charges a 5% licence fee for 3G equipment (including 3g/4g), a 3.5% license fee for pure 4G equipment, and a license fee of 65% of the net price of the equipment. That means Qualcomm still has a license to charge for the equipment, just 65 percent in China.

It is noteworthy that Qualcomm's reverse licensing model is no longer mandatory, but Qualcomm can still seek a reverse license from Chinese licensees. Qualcomm's president, Derrick Aboli, said in a connection with the Chinese media that "China's licensee has a choice". In other words, Chinese handset manufacturers can either obtain the 3G and 4G patent authorization separately according to the new offer, or they can insist the original license agreement. "With the reverse license, Qualcomm will negotiate with each licensee separately, similar to the way Qualcomm used to operate," said Derek. ”

Something

"Mobile phone prices are not much cheaper"

Mobile phone manufacturers have complained that Qualcomm charges lead to excessive cost of mobile phones, then the high Qualcomm charges, mobile phone prices will be reduced? "In fact, for each cell phone, it will not be too cheap," said Yanhui, secretary-general of the China Mobile Industry Alliance. Thousand Yuan Machine originally Qualcomm received 5%, now dozen a 65 percent also not cheap a few dollars, all consumer perception will not be obvious. ”

According to the China Federation of mobile phones, after the fee is lowered, Qualcomm spends about 200 million or 300 million dollars a year, or a billion of yuan. Even if the handset manufacturers all through the price to the consumer, a 2000 yuan mobile phone at most also province 30 yuan.

Mobile phone manufacturers said, "Qualcomm 认罚, the NDRC agreed to the TD 4G mobile phone charge 3.5% of royalties." But before that, domestic enterprises do not need to give Qualcomm to pay TD royalties. From this point of view, the future TD 4G mobile phone may not only not reduce prices, but will increase prices. ”

Yanhui said that before Qualcomm did not charge TD 4G royalties, a big reason is waiting for antitrust penalties. But Qualcomm is qualified to charge TD royalties.

View】

"Anti-Monopoly will guide domestic enterprises to innovate"

Mobile phone people believe that "hit 65 percent" does not fundamentally affect the mobile phone industry, but also need the NDRC to further promote, break the monopoly. Yanhui said that the NDRC did not manage corporate fees and charges, only under the anti-monopoly law, to solve the problem of unfairness. If the company thinks Qualcomm charges are too high, it can solve the problem through legal action.

Yanhui that the real rival machine industry has an impact on the "anti-licensing options," The change, Huawei, ZTE, Lenovo, the storage of mobile phone patents will have more competitive advantage. "Previously patents were free to Qualcomm, and future businesses could negotiate and cross authorize." ”

Yanhui that, for emerging mobile phone companies, the threshold for competition will increase. In the short term, the cost of emerging enterprises will increase, but in the long run, will guide the Chinese mobile phone industry to international management, focus on patents and innovation.

"has a negative impact on high pass penalties"

Ma Yu, director of Foreign Affairs at the Ministry of Commerce, said in an interview with the Beijing News that he objected to high fines. Ma Yu that the difference between the determination of technology monopoly has been relatively large, different from the ordinary price monopoly, technical monopoly is not good judgment. The imposition of heavy penalties on Qualcomm will have two negative consequences. First of all, domestic enterprises are more reluctant to innovate, because see by virtue of technology-leading enterprises are punished, will produce bad social effects. Second, after the price of Qualcomm chips, some domestic companies will be more dependent on foreign technology, rather than innovation, so Qualcomm in the domestic market share will be greater.

Ma Yu Microsoft as an example, that foreign technology monopoly is more relaxed. Microsoft's case has had a huge impact, but after the US investigation of Microsoft, it only banned its tying the mouse, and did not make a technical monopoly ruling. (Lin Chiling Liu Suhong)