Interesting. LogicFolding is something that seems so obvious in retrospect and yet somebody has to be the first to do it.

I did find it neat that it ends up actually reducing overall heat despite the multiple layer wafers as signals have less overall distance to travel as they move in layer space rather than across the chip.

Aren't Huawei on the Entity List? How can Qualcomm enter into agreements like this without getting into massive hot water?

Will be interesting to see how Ericsson - if at all - responds to this

Remember when they were telling us how important the 5G race was and how critical was for the US to lead it?

And now they are just giving it away ?

It's not mentioned on Huawei page, but this bloomberg article claims that the focus in on LogicFolding architecture https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-10-05/qualcomm-...

Meta question, but is the title of this article disappearing for others on HN? I'm unable to click. It seems all huawei.com links on this site have the same issue. Is it just me?

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunic... lol

Haha next Nortel waiting to happen?

Qualcomm doing sneaky stuff as usual. Nothing more

"This transaction will close following receipt of the necessary regulatory approvals"

...potentially resulting in new AI-relevant chips.

Patents serve cartels. Good luck for innovative startups trying to enter this rigged game.

Two patent thieves partner up.

Ah yes, Huawei, that well known adherent to patent agreements.

Thanks Trump

This is less surprising if you view telecom patents as a mutual-assured-infringement system rather than a moat for any single company. As others noted, Qualcomm (~$5B/yr in licensing), Huawei, Samsung, Ericsson and Nokia all hold overlapping SEPs for 5G — polar codes, massive MIMO, OFDM variants — so nobody can ship a compliant radio without infringing someone. Cross-licenses are the equilibrium: litigating everywhere Huawei actually sells (outside the US) would be ruinously expensive for Qualcomm, and Huawei needs Qualcomm's portfolio for handsets and IoT.

The interesting questions for me: 1) what FRAND rate they settled on, since that becomes a comp for future deals with smaller OEMs who don't have a portfolio to trade, and 2) how Entity List / regulatory approvals shape the structure — the announcement says closing follows regulatory approvals, which suggests carve-outs around what's actually transferable vs. pure patent peace. For startups the takeaway is sobering: the "patent wall" effect mentioned here means you're licensing from an oligopoly whether you build infrastructure or devices.

Standard SEP mutual assured destruction.

Neither company can ship modern cellular basebands or RAN silicon without stepping on the other's portfolio. FRAND terms make endless global litigation a negative-ROI exercise, Entity List or not. Cross-licensing is the only operational path to extract rents and lock third parties out.

[dead]

Cartels.

Qualcomm is a patent troll, boycott.

This tells you that China:

1. is no longer a threat for the US

2. no longer has (perhaps never had), the lead

3. was forced to bow down because has no leverage

The US still chooses what customers China has access to

How the turntables etc.

Pre sanctions, HW fine buying QC for mobile chipset StandardEssentialPatentswhile QC pay HW for 5g SEPs, with net balance favoring QC. Huawei indigenized mobile SoC + 5g hardware with Kirin 9000 in 2023. Hilariously, now that Huawei weaned off QC SoC... QC simply stuck net paying Huawei.