...Qualcomm will offer licenses to 3G and 4G essential patents and will no longer require the bundling of those rights with other patents in its portfolio...
Wow, is that a common tactic? No wonder antitrust was on them.
Wow, is that a common tactic? No wonder antitrust was on them.
And more specifically, 4g phones usually have fallback to 3g or even lower speeds, so if you're going to build a 4g phone, you almost always need to license the tech for 3g and prior. Unbundling the patents in this situation is great theoretically, but in practice it is likely to result in licensees not licensing enough patents, opening themselves up for patent lawsuits.
That's why the auction for the 600 Nortel patents was so important, they all need to cross-license from each other in order to build a product. Yes, having those patents means you've got more weight to swing around in the patent war, but you can't really build a telecommunications product without licensing a bunch of patents.
Again, theoretically this is an awesome idea. But in practice, this is really just government-sponsored theft from Qualcomm, and the only reason that Qualcomm is going with the flow is because China would be a huge market to lose. So they used to make $100 and they now make $65, or maybe even $25 due to reduced patent licensing? Better than $0.
e.g. Roger sells both candy bars and packs of gum, both of which cost him $0 to produce (for simplicity). Al is willing to pay $5 for a candy bar, but $1 for a pack of gum. Jesse willing to pay $1 for a candy bar and $5 for a pack of gum. Roger could sell one candy bar to Al for $5 and one pack of gum to Jesse for $5 for a total profit of $10. More optimally, Roger could sell a bundle consisting of both the candy bar and the pack of gum to both Al and Jesse for $6 for a total profit of $12. Bundling has optimally increased Roger's profits.