Pull to refresh
Logo
What Changed
Following Why Sign Up
Jury finds Arm breached Qualcomm license, awards $2 in damages

Jury finds Arm breached Qualcomm license, awards $2 in damages

Rule Changes

Qualcomm won the liability finding but only $2; the judge has yet to rule on its royalty remedy.

October 20th, 2026: Closing arguments held on v10 licensing and royalty penalty

Overview

Updated Nov 1

On October 13, a Delaware jury found Arm breached its architecture license with Qualcomm and interfered with Qualcomm's relationship with Meta. It awarded $2, one dollar for each claim, and both companies called the result a win.

Judge Maryellen Noreika has not issued her written decision on whether the breach lets Qualcomm suspend royalties for up to five years or whether to order talks on Arm's next-generation v10 design. Since the verdict, Arm announced a data-center security partnership with Axiado, and Qualcomm acquired Akeana, a startup that designs processors using the RISC-V architecture.

Why it matters

Arm's licensing terms shape costs across nearly every smartphone; a Qualcomm royalty suspension could reshape chip pricing and design freedom industrywide.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

$2
Nominal damages awarded to Qualcomm
Jury awarded $1 on each of two claims: breach of the architecture license and interference with Meta.
4 of 6
Claims the jury sided with Arm on
Arm prevailed on four claims, including that it did not breach the technology licensing agreement.
5 years
Potential royalty suspension for Qualcomm
If the judge finds a material breach, Qualcomm could stop paying Arm royalties for up to five years.
$32B
SoftBank's 2016 purchase of Arm
The acquisition shifted Arm from pure architecture licensor toward selling its own chips, the root of the dispute.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Sign up to generate historical perspectives on this story.

Log in Sign Up

People Involved

Cristiano Amon
Cristiano Amon
Chief executive, Qualcomm
Active; testified at trial; Qualcomm called the verdict a win
 Rene Haas
Rene Haas
Chief executive, Arm Holdings
Active; testified at trial; Arm called the $2 award a vindication
 Maryellen Noreika
Maryellen Noreika
U.S. District Judge, District of Delaware
Presiding; heard closing arguments on October 20 and said she would issue a written decision
 Catherine Nyarady
Catherine Nyarady
Lead litigation partner, Paul, Weiss
Led Qualcomm's trial team

Organizations Involved

Arm Holdings
Arm Holdings
Semiconductor IP company
Defendant; found to have breached architecture license; judge's remedy decision pending

Designer of the chip architecture used in most smartphones; owned by SoftBank since 2016.
Qualcomm
Qualcomm
Semiconductor company
Won breach verdict; judge has not ruled on royalty suspension or v10 talks

San Diego chipmaker and one of Arm's largest customers, now building its own Arm-based CPU cores.
Meta Platforms
Meta Platforms
Technology company
Third party; business relationship with Qualcomm found to have been interfered with

Qualcomm customer; Arm was found to have interfered with their relationship.
SoftBank Group Corp.
SoftBank Group Corp.
Conglomerate and investment holding, Tokyo Stock Exchange-listed
Owner of Arm

Japanese investment conglomerate that acquired Arm in 2016 and has pushed it into selling its own chips.
NU
Nuvia
Semiconductor startup
Qualcomm subsidiary since 2021; subject of earlier Arm lawsuit

Server-chip startup acquired by Qualcomm; its Arm license was the hinge of the first Qualcomm-Arm trial.

Timeline

July 2016 October 2026

8 events Latest: October 20th, 2026 · 3 weeks ago
Tap a bar to jump to that date

  1. Closing arguments held on v10 licensing and royalty penalty

    Latest Legal

    Judge Noreika heard arguments on Qualcomm's request for court-ordered v10 talks and on the five-year royalty clause. She called forced negotiations 'very, very drastic' and said she would issue a written decision.

  2. Jury finds Arm breached license, awards $2

    Verdict

    Jury found Arm breached the architecture license and interfered with Qualcomm's Meta relationship; awarded $1 per claim. Arm won four other claims.

  3. Arm announces Axiado server security partnership

    Business

    Arm said it would embed Axiado secure control modules in its AGI CPU server platform for data-center deployments, the same day the jury returned its verdict.

  4. Qualcomm acquires RISC-V startup Akeana

    Acquisition

    Akeana's chief executive confirmed the acquisition in a LinkedIn post, EE Times reported on October 22. The startup designs processors using RISC-V, an architecture that competes with Arm's.

  5. Qualcomm sues Arm for breach of architecture license

    Legal

    Qualcomm accused Arm of withholding software patches and verification tools and refusing reasonable licensing terms.

  6. Jury clears Qualcomm in Nuvia dispute

    Legal

    Delaware jury rejected most of Arm's claims; Qualcomm won the first round of the licensing war.

  7. Arm sues Qualcomm over Nuvia acquisition

    Legal

    Arm alleged Qualcomm's purchase of server-chip startup Nuvia breached Nuvia's architecture license.

  8. SoftBank agrees to buy Arm for $32 billion

    Acquisition

    The takeover set Arm on a path from licensing architecture to designing its own chips, the root of today's conflict.

Scenarios

1

Judge lets Qualcomm suspend Arm royalty payments for up to five years

Possible Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: Tom's Hardware, Reuters

Under the architecture license, a material breach can let Qualcomm stop paying royalties for up to five years. Judge Noreika must rule on that and on whether Arm negotiated new licensing terms in good faith. If she allows the suspension, Arm loses hundreds of millions to billions in revenue and its leverage over Qualcomm's custom cores erodes.

2

Judge rejects royalty suspension; Qualcomm and Arm head to appeals

Possible Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: Reuters, Bloomberg Law

Arm argues the $2 award proves its claims lacked merit. If Judge Noreika declines the royalty suspension and finds Arm negotiated in good faith, the fight moves to the Federal Circuit on appeal while both companies return to commercial terms. Either company can appeal an unfavorable ruling.

3

Qualcomm and Arm settle before the judge rules

Uncertain Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Industry analysts, trade press

Both companies have commercial incentive to end the fight. Qualcomm licenses Arm technology through 2033 and ships millions of Arm-based chips. A settlement could trade license renewals, Nuvia arrangements, and royalty terms for dropped claims, avoiding the uncertainty of the judge's rulings.

4

Judge orders Arm to negotiate v10 licensing in good faith

Unlikely Resolves by End of 2026

Discussed by: Qualcomm, Bloomberg, Briefs.co

Qualcomm asked Judge Noreika to order talks on Arm's next-generation v10 design. At the October 20 hearing, Noreika called that remedy 'very, very drastic' and questioned whether a California unfair-competition law let her set rates. She said she would issue a written decision.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

April 2011 - June 2018

Apple v. Samsung smartphone patent wars (2011-2018)

Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone's design and interface. A 2012 jury awarded Apple over $1 billion, but appeals cut the damages and sent the case back for retrial on design patents.

Then

The verdict shrank through years of appeals and retrials.

Now

The companies settled in 2018 with terms undisclosed, ending a seven-year global fight over smartphone patents.

Why this matters now

Billions claimed, years of litigation, and a final outcome far from the original headlines — the licensing war's strategic stakes, not the verdict size, drive the endgame.

March 2003 - 2010

SCO Group v. IBM (2003-2010)

SCO claimed IBM misappropriated Unix code and sought billions in damages. SCO's licensing revenue collapsed as the case dragged on, and it filed for bankruptcy in 2007.

Then

SCO lost the core claims and won no major damages.

Now

The case illustrated how claimed damages can dwarf what courts ultimately award, and how litigation can destroy the claimant.

Why this matters now

The gap between what a licensing plaintiff demands and what a jury awards can be enormous — here, Qualcomm's claims for billions against Arm produced $2.

2005 - April 2009

Broadcom v. Qualcomm (2005-2009)

Broadcom sued Qualcomm over cellular patents covering video compression and other features. A jury found infringement and the U.S. International Trade Commission banned some Qualcomm chips.

Then

The companies settled in 2009, with Qualcomm agreeing to pay Broadcom royalties over several years.

Now

Qualcomm fought to preserve its royalty-based licensing model as a defendant in trench warfare over chip patents.

Why this matters now

Qualcomm, once the accused defending its royalty model, now plays the accusing side against Arm's royalty demands — a reversal of roles in the same industry.

Sources

(18)
+12
CNBC Bloomberg Law Qualcomm Investor Relations Arm Newsroom Tom's Hardware Paul, Weiss The Verge Notebookcheck U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware TechPowerUp Bloomberg Briefs.co EE Times Reuters via Investing.com U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware Foreign Policy Journal Computerworld EE Times