Three major charges of Qualcomm's monopoly in Qualcomm's anti-monopoly case

1, charging unfairly high patent license fees. When licensing enterprises in China, they refused to provide a patent list, and expired patents were always included in the patent portfolio, and they were charged a license fee. The licensee in China is required to make a free reverse license for the relevant patents it holds, and refuses to deduct the patent value of the reverse license from the license fee or provide other consideration. For the licensees who are forced to accept the license of non-standard essential patent packages in China, Qualcomm insists on a higher license rate and collects the patent license fee according to the net wholesale price of the whole machine.

2. There is no justifiable reason to bind the necessary patent license for non-wireless communication standards. Instead of distinguishing the essential patents of different wireless communication standards from those of non-wireless communication standards and licensing them separately, we take advantage of our dominant position in the market of essential patents of wireless communication standards and tie-in the essential patents of non-wireless communication standards without justifiable reasons.

3. Add unreasonable conditions to the sales of baseband chips. Signing and not challenging the patent license agreement is the condition for the licensee in China to obtain the supply of its baseband chips. If the potential licensee fails to sign the patent license agreement containing the above unreasonable terms, or the licensee objects to the patent license agreement and files a lawsuit, Qualcomm refuses to provide the baseband chip.