• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    That’s a bullshit argument, practically it’s the same as if Nuvia sold their license to Qualcomm, which they obviously wouldn’t have the right to do.
    I don’t see how Arm lost this suit, they did NOT grant that license to Qualcomm. The judgement seems ridiculous.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        There’s a difference between an order contract an a license.
        The license to make Arm CPU was granted to Nuvia not to Qualcomm.

        Qualcomm using the license, is the same as transferring or selling it, and that’s NOT normal with a patent or copyright license. Except if it is kept within the intended scope.

        Qualcomm taking over the license changes the scope, and that would usually be clearly enough to invalidate it.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          No, there is not. A license is just a contract.

          Buying a company because they have a license you want is not remotely unusual. It’s perfectly standard behavior, and the entire enterprise world would fall apart if an acquisition lost the rights to licenses the purchased business owned.