top of page
搜尋

On the Rationality of Bundled Rebate Program in Modem Chip Industry: an Analysis on Qualcomm’s Case

  • 作家相片: Thomas Y. Lu
    Thomas Y. Lu
  • 2019年6月20日
  • 讀畢需時 1 分鐘

Abstract:

This paper examines the motivations of a patent holder, for example, Qualcomm holding many standard essential patents (SEPs) on modem chips, to implement a bundled rebate program for its customers, Apple for instance, under the risk of violating antitrust law. This study originates from the lawsuit between Qualcomm, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and Apple. In early 2017, both FTC and Qualcomm’s customer, Apple, sued Qualcomm for violating antitrust law. Qualcomm was alleged to have manipulated “web of contracts” by implementing so-called no license, no chips policy to achieve its anticompetitive purpose. By addressing the case law of antitrust regime related to bundled rebate and loyalty discount, we understand legal risks that Qualcomm might face. Moreover, in this paper, we build a game- theoretical model to explore business reasons why Qualcomm insists on implementing the bundled rebate and loyalty discount program, regardless of latent legal risks. It is shown that Qualcomm might desire to mitigate future loss from price war with potential competitors. Finally, this article concludes with expectations for future studies on the impact of the Federal Court if SEPs and modem chips cannot be bundled together.


 
 
 

最新文章

查看全部
代言與社群媒體影響者的潛在法律責任分析—以美國法為例

摘要: 本文所探求之問題在於:在網路與社 群媒體興起的時代,代言人或社群媒體影 響者所可能面臨的法律風險有哪些?而提 供他們從事代言行為的平台商也會有連帶 負責的風險嗎?透過了解網路與社群媒體 的經營模式,我們會發現這些新媒體所產 生的法律風險與過去傳統媒體所產生的法...

 
 
 
綑綁行為的法律與經濟分析-以美國高通案為例

摘要: 本文在美國高通案的基礎上,來探究綑綁回扣行為在違反或符合反托拉斯法的情形下對消費者的影響為何。多數過去的經濟文獻僅討論產品與產品間的綑綁行為,而沒有考慮專利授權與產品間的綑綁情形。因此,這些文獻並無法合理地說明類似高通案的綑綁回扣行為是否對消費者不利,並進而違反托拉...

 
 
 

Comments


文章: Blog2_Post

©2020 by 盧 憶(Thomas Y. Lu). Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page