I believe the implication is that ARM will IPO and that companies like Qualcomm are ready to buy up major minority stakes.Better than Nvidia ownership. Not sure if it's better than an ARM IPO (though it is probably poor timing).
That's the rub. Will it be a truly open consortium?As long as the consortium is open (as in rand - reasonable and non discriminatory) to any Arm licensee I'm actually fine with this approach.
There is legal framework and implications for such an arrangement. Most of the companies involved already belong to or license patents from consortiums that are only permitted to operate because they offer FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms.That's the rub. Will it be a truly open consortium?
I do share the same sentiment. It is better and fair for a company like ARM to be owned by many rather than by just Nvidia.Better than Nvidia ownership. Not sure if it's better than an ARM IPO (though it is probably poor timing).
FIFY, but I agree. If ARM were to go the IPO route, somebody would buy them out soon enough. Turning ARM into a jointly owned company, though challenging, would be mutually beneficial. Not a business major, so I have no idea how something like this is done.There is legal framework and implications for such an arrangement. Most of the companies involved already belong to or license patents from consortiums that are only permitted to operate because they offer FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) terms.
Frankly for something like ARM this is preferable to a single company that's a licensee from owning a majority controlling stake. A collection ofadversariescompetitors keeps the collective surprisingly honest.