Qualcomm and Arm's legal squabble is expected to remain on hold until the coming year

In the world of technology, the ongoing legal dispute between Qualcomm and Arm has been a topic of interest for many. Here's a breakdown of the key events that have unfolded so far.

The trial for Qualcomm's counter-claim against Arm was initially scheduled for March or April 2026, but a mistrial in the previous trial temporarily put the dispute on pause in December. The trial date has since been moved to February 2026, suggesting that the dispute could drag out for at least another year.

The initial lawsuit between the two tech giants resulted in a jury upholding Qualcomm's right to manufacture Snapdragon X chips based on the existing agreement with Arm. However, Arm has stated an intention to pursue an appeal in the initial trial.

At the heart of the dispute is Qualcomm's accusation that Arm has employed aggressive patent infringement tactics and sought to invalidate Arm's patents in its counterclaim. Qualcomm's aim is to weaken Arm's legal position and complicate the litigation, shifting the focus toward Qualcomm's own patent portfolio. This escalation in the dispute could potentially influence negotiations or prolong the lawsuit.

The question of whether Nuvia, a company now owned by Qualcomm, violated its agreement with Arm remains unresolved. Meanwhile, Arm has proposed an amended version of its documents to be refiled, and Qualcomm has done the same. A redacted version of Qualcomm's complaint was provided to a certain website.

The agreement between Qualcomm and Arm to manufacture custom cores extends until 2033. The Snapdragon X Oryon CPU cores are officially licensed under this agreement. The Snapdragon X Elite 2 chipset could be released this year, assuming Qualcomm continues to be able to manufacture Oryon CPU cores.

The crux of Qualcomm's counter-claim brief is its allegation that Arm sees its licensees as competition and is seeking to drive businesses into using Arm's pre-packaged CPU cores. Qualcomm accuses Arm of employing wrongful tactics to stifle Qualcomm's technological leaps in CPU design and coerce Qualcomm into renegotiating its agreement on more favorable terms.

In a bid to resolve the dispute, the presiding Judge Maryellen Noreika suggested both parties seek mediation. As the legal battle between Qualcomm and Arm continues, the tech industry eagerly awaits its resolution, with potential implications for competition and innovation in the chip-making sector.

Qualcomm and Arm's legal squabble is expected to remain on hold until the coming year