Who owns 4G mobile technology?

Patent pie-slice analysis gives LG a gutbuster portion


Analyst Peter Misek has been crawling through piles of patents to guess who owns LTE, with the surprise result that most of it belongs to LG Electronics.

The details of who pays whom for the rights to create LTE handsets aren't public, but Peter Misek, of Jefferies & Co., has checked out 1,400 patents related to the next-generation mobile comms standard and advised investors (and Forbes) of his calculated ownership breakdown.

Chart showing patent ownership by number

Patents by number, not quality, but interesting none the less

It's important because LTE is the preferred 4G standard, and every LTE handset will have to pay royalties to those with the patents. Misek's figures are only educated guesswork, but he places LG Electronics with the biggest share of the spoils with 23 per cent of the pot.

It's no surprise that Qualcomm comes in second with 21 per cent. Qualcomm owns a much greater share of 3G, having developed the CDMA technology on which most 3G networks are based, but while it takes five per cent of the profit on every 3G handset sold it has admitted it only gets 3.2 per cent on an LTE handset.

Taking a slight statistical leap of faith we can calculate that manufacturers are handing over around 16 per cent of their gross profits to patent holders, which is perfectly plausible.

After the biggies we see Motorola, now the property of Google, and InterDigital, which is in the process of flogging off its patent portfolio and should attract some serious attention. ZTE's holding might surprise, but the Chinese company has been catching up with the whole patent thing lately.

Nortel's patents are owned by a cross-licensing consortium of manufacturers including Apple and Microsoft - names that don't appear anywhere else in the analysis, which only covers the core radio technologies (as opposed to interfacing or design, where both companies are amply represented).

The number of patents isn't any guide to their quality, obviously; some can be worked around while others are invalidated or contested, but this raw count does give some indication of who will be suing whom when the next round of litigation kicks off. ®


Other stories you might like

  • Train once, run anywhere, almost: Qualcomm's drive to bring AI to its phone, PC chips
    Software toolkit offered to save developers time, effort, battery power

    Qualcomm knows that if it wants developers to build and optimize AI applications across its portfolio of silicon, the Snapdragon giant needs to make the experience simpler and, ideally, better than what its rivals have been cooking up in the software stack department.

    That's why on Wednesday the fabless chip designer introduced what it's calling the Qualcomm AI Stack, which aims to, among other things, let developers take AI models they've developed for one device type, let's say smartphones, and easily adapt them for another, like PCs. This stack is only for devices powered by Qualcomm's system-on-chips, be they in laptops, cellphones, car entertainment, or something else.

    While Qualcomm is best known for its mobile Arm-based Snapdragon chips that power many Android phones, the chip house is hoping to grow into other markets, such as personal computers, the Internet of Things, and automotive. This expansion means Qualcomm is competing with the likes of Apple, Intel, Nvidia, AMD, and others, on a much larger battlefield.

    Continue reading
  • Qualcomm wins EU court battle against $1b antitrust fine
    Another setback for competition watchdog as ruling over exclusive chip deal with iPhone nullified

    The European Commission's competition enforcer is being handed another defeat, with the EU General Court nullifying a $1.04 billion (€997 million) antitrust fine against Qualcomm.

    The decision to reverse the fine is directed at the body's competition team, headed by Danish politico Margrethe Vestager, which the General Court said made "a number of procedural irregularities [which] affected Qualcomm's rights of defense and invalidate the Commission's analysis" of Qualcomm's conduct. 

    At issue in the original case was a series of payments Qualcomm made to Apple between 2011 and 2016, which the competition enforcer had claimed were made in order to guarantee the iPhone maker exclusively used Qualcomm chips.

    Continue reading
  • Former chip research professor jailed for not disclosing Chinese patents
    This is how Beijing illegally accesses US tech, say Feds

    The former director of the University of Arkansas’ High Density Electronics Center, a research facility that specialises in electronic packaging and multichip technology, has been jailed for a year for failing to disclose Chinese patents for his inventions.

    Professor Simon Saw-Teong Ang was in 2020 indicted for wire fraud and passport fraud, with the charges arising from what the US Department of Justice described as a failure to disclose “ties to companies and institutions in China” to the University of Arkansas or to the US government agencies for which the High Density Electronics Center conducted research under contract.

    At the time of the indictment, then assistant attorney general for national security John C. Demers described Ang’s actions as “a hallmark of the China’s targeting of research and academic collaborations within the United States in order to obtain U.S. technology illegally.” The DoJ statement about the indictment said Ang’s actions had negatively impacted NASA and the US Air Force.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022