Uber Wins Court Case Over Obscure Terms and Conditions (Aug 18, 2017)
Qualcomm reported its results for the June 2017 quarter today, and revenues and profits were both down, in large part because of the various antitrust and other disputes and legal proceedings in which it’s involved. Shortfalls in revenue from Apple, several of its suppliers, and a Chinese customer each caused problems, but it also had to pay out to both BlackBerry and the Korean government over separate disputes. It’s impossible to look at Qualcomm today without noticing the massive cloud of uncertainty and potential financial liability associated with these various cases. On a non-GAAP basis, the company’s results are holding up rather better, though still not stellar. As with Samsung, its semiconductor business was an area of strength, but its core MSM chip sales continue to decline over time as the smartphone market matures, while the broader opportunity it has in CDMA and related technologies continues to grow. Meanwhile, Apple, its suppliers, and Qualcomm all filed new suits over the last couple of days in relation to their dispute, even as Qualcomm’s CEO was quoted earlier this week as saying he expected the case eventually to end in a settlement.
via Financial Times
Vizio Files Suit Against LeEco Over Merger Termination Fee (Jul 12, 2017)
LeEco was to have acquired TV maker Vizio, but after months of delays the deal finally fell apart earlier this year, and now Vizio is suing LeEco over non-payment of part of the termination fee the companies agreed when they made the deal. The suit also alleges that LeEco never had the means to complete the deal, using it merely as a way to bolster its perceived financial stability at a time when there were lots of reports about its cash constraints. Given that those financial problems have only worsened since the deal closed, I’m not sure Vizio is getting the money it wants anytime soon, even if it wins the case. But LeEco is just getting clobbered at this point as a result of problems entirely of its own making, all of which stem from expanding overly aggressively from what had been a reasonably strong position in the Chinese market.
Waymo Drops Three of Four Patent Claims Against Uber (Jul 7, 2017)
Waymo has dropped three of the four patent claims in its lawsuit against Uber, partially complying with a suggestion from the judge in the case. The patents dropped relate to a design which Waymo became aware of, but which Uber doesn’t actually use and has promised not to use going forward, making them much less important. The judge has indicated throughout the process that he largely believes Waymo’s claims about Anthony Levandowski downloading files and bringing them to Uber, but has also suggested that the patent part of the lawsuit is going to be tough to prove and should be set aside by Waymo. Uber is, of course, trumpeting the news as a sign that the whole thing is misguided, while at the same time seeking depositions of Alphabet executives with a few to showing that the suit is motivated by a desire to slow Uber’s efforts down rather than a true desire for legal redress. The tone of Uber’s statement to various outlets today certainly suggests that it isn’t backing down on its aggressive response following the departure of Travis Kalanick as CEO, answering one of the questions I posed at the time he stepped down. Ultimately, though, narrowing the case to a few key points and potentially even dropping the remaining patent claim is likely to give Waymo a better chance at winning in court, even if the scope of that win is smaller than it originally hoped. Update: later in the day, the judge granted Uber’s request to depose Larry Page for up to four hours, per Recode.
Apple Adds New Claims to Qualcomm Lawsuit (Jun 20, 2017)
Apple Hires Senior Qualcomm Engineer as Wireless SoC Lead (May 29, 2017)
Apple and Nokia Settle Patent Litigation (May 23, 2017)
The judge in the Uber-Waymo case has told Uber in no uncertain terms that it has to do all it can to get its employee, Anthony Levandowski, to comply with the court’s orders in terms of handing over documents and disclosing other information relevant to the case. As such, given his continued unwillingness to cooperate, Uber has officially threatened to fire him – something it certainly doesn’t want to do – and his lawyers are now fighting back. Levandowski has throughout this process invoked his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination, but that in turn has made it harder for Uber to defend itself, because much of the most relevant information has been held back by Levandowski. At this point, it feels like both Uber and Levandowski are coming off badly around this whole situation, given that it seems very clear that Uber was working with Levandowski before he left Waymo, and Levandowski clearly feels he has something to hide. I very much doubt Levandowski will actually be fired, but it’s remarkable that he continues to resist these clear orders from the judge even as his job is at stake. Meanwhile, both parties – Levandowski and his employer – seem remarkably willing to throw each other under the bus, which says something both about the stakes here and the prevailing culture at the company.