Both companies declared victory after a jury verdict on 13 October, yet the outcome may hinge on decisions still to come from US District Judge Maryellen Noreika. The panel determined that Arm had breached its licensing agreement with Qualcomm and intentionally interfered with Qualcomm's business dealings involving Meta, but assigned damages of just $1 on each count—$2 in total.
Arm maintained that the minimal award vindicated its position. "The jury's verdict confirms that Arm operated in good faith under its technology license agreement and its award of only two dollars confirms the merit of Arm's arguments in the case," the company stated.
The jury found Arm had failed to meet its obligation to supply software patches and tools for its designs. However, it rejected most of Qualcomm's other breach allegations. On the Meta interference claim, jurors determined Arm's conduct was both intentional and negligent.
According to Qualcomm's account, the company was on the verge of closing a deal with Meta in 2024 when Arm allegedly tipped off Bloomberg News about Qualcomm's alleged breach of its licensing terms. Qualcomm contended this disclosure derailed the transaction.
We are gratified that the jury found Arm breached its long-standing Architectural License Agreement (ALA) with Qualcomm, failed to honor its commitments, and intentionally acted to disrupt Qualcomm's businesses.
Qualcomm, in a statement
The real battle lies ahead
Arm has characterized the lawsuit as an attempt by Qualcomm to strip away billions in licensing revenue. Judge Noreika must now resolve several outstanding matters that could reshape the financial relationship between the two firms.
The licensing agreement contains a clause that could permit Qualcomm to cease paying Arm royalties for a five-year period following a breach finding. Such a suspension could represent billions of dollars in forgone payments. Arm contests whether courts have the authority to enforce this provision.
Qualcomm may also leverage the interference finding in a separate dispute over Arm's refusal to negotiate constructively regarding the next iteration of its technology—another matter the judge must adjudicate. Whichever party loses in these determinations is expected to pursue an appeal.
From partnership to courtroom
This marks the second trial between the two companies in as many years, with the latest proceeding spanning five days. The deterioration of their relationship traces back to SoftBank's acquisition of Arm in 2016, after which Arm shifted its business model from purely licensing chip designs to developing and commercializing its own processors, including the in-house AGI CPU.
Qualcomm, for its part, continues to advance its own processor lineup, notably the Oryon CPUs. The company introduced its latest Snapdragon chips in September, with the flagship phone processor now offered in two distinct configurations.
Source: The Next Web
