The porcessor is the brian of a computer - European offishial
|
|
|
Qualcomm accused of unfair trade
South Korean watchdog goes for blood
Wed Mar 11 2009, 18:03
THE SOUTH KOREAN TRADE COMMISSION looks like it is going to regulate wireless chip maker Qualcomm's business practices in the country.
The KFTC is miffed at the way Qualcomm sets prices and integrates multimedia technology into its chipsets, which are used in mobile phones which it says is anti-competetive.
Qualcomm does not think it has done anything wrong, but its rivals claim that it reneged on agreements it made while developing the WCDMA Wideband Code Division Multiple Access standard.
Intel thought it did no wrong too but that didn't stop the KFTC giving it a spank. µ
L'Inq
PC World
Share this:
Share
Advertisement
Subscribe to INQ newsletters
Advertisement
INQ Poll
meh
I work for a small-medium sized company and some of our products are directly competing with a very big company. The big company is privately owned and cash rich. While we are publicly owned (by shareholders). Even though our products are better by design, what the big company is able to do is undermine their profit by selling at a loss. This can sway customers to buy their products, while we cannot do the same without shareholders asking a lot of questions. Luckily we work very closely with customers, but if this happens a lot, we will not be able to sell enough to remain afloat. Flattening the little guy over time while the big company has lots of cash reserve to weather it. Anti-competitive? I think so.
This convinces me that all this "anti-competitive" crap is just to extract money from companies doing well.
"The KFTC is miffed at the way Qualcomm sets prices and integrates multimedia technology into its chipsets, which are used in mobile phones which it says is anti-competetive."
What should they do then? Start selling each chip separately? Isn't a company even given a right to decide what form their products are to take? And why don't KTFC and EU sue Apple? Just because it doesn't have the majority of market share? Why just sue MS and Intel? Is it a crime to succeed? Why always favor the underdog? If some company succeeds by doing well, they deserve to keep that success unless the competitors do better.