|
gptkbp:instanceOf
|
gptkb:law
|
|
gptkbp:allegation
|
antitrust violations
unfair licensing practices
|
|
gptkbp:appealsCourt
|
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
|
|
gptkbp:appealsCourtRuling
|
reversed district court decision
|
|
gptkbp:category
|
gptkb:United_States_antitrust_case
technology law case
|
|
gptkbp:citation
|
411 F. Supp. 3d 658 (N.D. Cal. 2019)
969 F.3d 974 (9th Cir. 2020)
|
|
gptkbp:date
|
2020-08-11
|
|
gptkbp:defendant
|
gptkb:Qualcomm_Incorporated
|
|
gptkbp:districtCourtRuling
|
in favor of FTC
|
|
gptkbp:filingDate
|
2017-01-17
|
|
gptkbp:fullName
|
gptkb:Federal_Trade_Commission_v._Qualcomm_Incorporated
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
FTC v. Qualcomm
|
|
gptkbp:impact
|
significant for technology and antitrust law
|
|
gptkbp:judge
|
gptkb:Lucy_H._Koh
|
|
gptkbp:jurisdiction
|
gptkb:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California
|
|
gptkbp:numberOfIssues
|
exclusive dealing
FRAND licensing
royalty rates
|
|
gptkbp:plaintiff
|
gptkb:Federal_Trade_Commission
|
|
gptkbp:relatedOrganization
|
gptkb:Apple_Inc.
gptkb:Intel_Corporation
gptkb:Samsung_Electronics
|
|
gptkbp:result
|
Qualcomm prevailed on appeal
|
|
gptkbp:subject
|
patent licensing
mobile phone chipsets
|
|
gptkbp:bfsParent
|
gptkb:Qualcomm
|
|
gptkbp:bfsLayer
|
5
|