The Apple Jury v. Qualcomm includes a pilot, a former MLB pitcher and a retired nurse

A retired pilot, a retired baseball pitcher and nurse enter a bar …

This may seem like the beginning of a bad joke, but it's actually part of the professions performed by the jury members chosen for the Apple v. Qualcomm in San Diego. These nine people will decide the fate of Qualcomm's licensing activities in its battle against Apple and its manufacturing partners.

Monday marked the start of the $ 27 billion five-week trial that will determine whether Qualcomm operates a smartphone modem chip monopoly and imposes too high licensing fees. The jury trial is currently before Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Southern District of California, San Diego, US Court. The result could affect the wireless networks your phone has access to.

Apple has accused Qualcomm of anti-competitive practices that have had the effect of increasing token prices, restricting competition and harming customer choice. Qualcomm retorted that the iPhone would not be possible without its technology, and it deserves to be paid for its innovation.

The selection of the jury lasted all day Monday. The selected people have been moderately young, quite diverse and well educated (not all people are white pensioners). Three of the nine jury members are women. Only half of the group members are white and only two are retired.

A juror is a retired clinical psychologist who counseled terminally ill children. After retiring from his private practice, he worked with UnitedHealthcare to investigate suicide attempts and suicides.

Another man is a former Kansas City Royals professional pitcher. He is now working as an air traffic controller in San Diego. A third member of the jury is a pilot, and another juror holds an MBA in Retail Management and works in a power tools business.

One of the three women jury is an environmental consultant who helps companies comply with the law on safe water. Another woman is an accountant and the third is a retired nurse who has informed other nurses about home care practices. The nurse, an African-American MBA graduate, also asked Curiel to tell Curiel that she had read some articles about the story, but had decided not to read them.

"There was another article yesterday that I did not read either," she said.

"Excellent!" Curiel responded as he spoke to the rest of the potential jury group. "I want you to model your behavior after the first juror."

The group of potential jurors was made up of several people with a background in technology. A couple worked with the army in the field of cellular technology. One of them even associated with Qualcomm on a military project that ultimately failed. Another is an IT solutions architect who set up a private LTE network for his business.

All people with an engineering degree or technology expertise were fired, with the exception of a man who previously worked for the Department of Defense. He is now working in metrology, measuring radiation levels for safety, and calibrating equipment to ensure proper operation.

The sixth member of the jury did not talk about his job during the selection process.

Battle history

Apple, which initially filed a lawsuit against Qualcomm in January 2017, claims to have essentially paid Qualcomm twice, first by buying processors and then paying royalties. The Californian company of Cupertino, Calif., Said that it should pay a fee based solely on the cost of the wireless chip inside its iPhone. Apple's partners, Foxconn and Pegatron, who assemble its devices, accept and join the trial. Qualcomm retorts that it is not a monopoly and claims that its technology is more than modems. It should therefore be compensated based on the selling price of the phone itself.

Tens of billions of dollars are at stake in this case. Apple's manufacturing partners want a $ 9 billion refund for alleged royalty overpayments since 2013. Under antitrust law, this amount could be tripled. Qualcomm itself claims damages for breach of contract, without specifying the amount. An even bigger concern for Qualcomm is whether it will have to change its entire business model, by charging much lower fees based on the price of its chips rather than the phones in which they are installed

For consumers, this ongoing battle could result in iPhone connectivity speeds that are second to none with Android devices. Apple's current provider of modems, Intel, does not have a ready 5G chip yet. Qualcomm is the only option for handset manufacturers who want to run the ultra-fast wireless network this year. We can not see a IPhone 5G until 2020 or even 2021. If Qualcomm and Apple fail to solve their problems, it is unlikely that Apple will re-integrate Qualcomm modems into its iPhone. Even if Apple manages to reduce Qualcomm's license costs, it is highly unlikely that Apple will reduce the price of its iPhone and pass on the savings to consumers.

The court will continue Tuesday with the pleadings and the first witnesses of Apple. In person, he will call Tony Blevins, Apple's vice president of purchasing, and will also broadcast several video testimonials.