Qualcomm wins a breach verdict against Arm worth $2 in damages
Jurors in Delaware found Arm breached its license agreement with Qualcomm and awarded $2 in nominal damages. Both companies claimed a win, and Notebookcheck reported that issues still open could have greater financial implications than the award.
The Product Desk

Key figures: Qualcomm accused Arm of scuttling a $170 million chip sale to Meta, a disputed figure. That sale was 85 million times the jury's $2 award, also disputed. Qualcomm says a contract provision could allow it to stop paying royalties for five years following a breach.
| Figure | Value | Note | Claim |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meta chip sale Qualcomm accused Arm of scuttling | $170 million | disputed | 15 |
| That sale vs. the $2 award | 85 million times | disputed | 18 |
| Years Qualcomm says it could stop paying royalties | 5 years | Contract provision, after a breach | 2 |
What happened
- Qualcomm's case alleged that Arm scuttled a $170 million chip sale to Meta by withholding software, violating pricing structures and leaking a license-termination warning letter.
- Arm's shares fell about 1% after the decision, Notebookcheck reported.
- An earlier jury, in a trial that began in December 2024, found Qualcomm did not violate the license when it acquired Nuvia and built the Oryon-based Snapdragon X chips.
Why it matters
- Who's exposed exposure Arm carries the larger exposure: if the court accepts Qualcomm's reading of its contract provision, the breach finding could support five years of withheld royalties.
- What doesn't add up contradiction Arm says the $2 confirms it acted in good faith, yet the same jury found it intentionally interfered with Qualcomm's Meta relationship, so each side reads one verdict as proof of its own case.
- What it limits constraint Roadmap risk here is inferred from an open dispute under a license that runs to 2033; neither source reports an injunction or a changed product schedule.
Next story · Invest · 57m ago
SoftBank weighs buying Allied Universal, the largest US security services firm, at about $18 billionConfirmed2 publishers
Whoever has to explain this verdict on Monday gets two facts that pull apart: a finding of breach and a damages award of $2 [1][3]. Arm reads the second as vindication. It said "the jury's verdict confirms that Arm operated in good faith under its technology license agreement" [6]. Qualcomm reads the first as vindication and said in a statement, "This outcome is a victory for innovation and competition" [7].
The amount is easiest to follow through Arm's account. Arm said the jury awarded $1 on each of the two claims it lost [14], which adds up to the $2 total [13]. Arm also said it won four other claims, so by its count six claims went to the jury [17]. Thurrott gives only the total and wrote, "It's unclear why the damages award was so low" [19].
Scale matters here. Qualcomm accused Arm of scuttling a $170 million chip sale to Meta [15], and that sale was 85 million times the award [18]. The comparison is of scale only. The $170 million is the size of the sale as Thurrott describes it, and a damages demand is a different number.
The larger money sits elsewhere. Thurrott reports that Qualcomm originally sought to avoid paying Arm licensing fees for five years [8]. Notebookcheck says Qualcomm is still pressing a contract provision that it says could allow that after a breach [2], and that these issues could have greater financial implications than the award [9].
This is the second trial. The first began in December 2024, and its jury found that Qualcomm did not violate the license when it acquired Nuvia and built the Oryon-based Snapdragon X chips [12]. Arm originally pledged to appeal and withdrew its complaints in February 2025 [16]. Notebookcheck dates the strain between the companies to 2016, when SoftBank took control of Arm and Arm began developing its own chips [10].
Qualcomm's own statement on the product side is brief: "we remain focused on developing and delivering industry-leading semiconductor products including our Oryon CPUs" [11].
For a team that buys or builds on Arm-licensed silicon, a two-by-two sorts the open items. One axis is decided or pending. The other is whether the item moves money between the two companies or changes what ships to you.
The breach and interference findings are decided and move money between the companies, and the amount is $2. The first trial is decided and bears on what ships, because it cleared the Snapdragon X chips. The royalty provision is pending and moves money between the companies. The box for pending items that change what ships is empty in both sources.
Plans change when something enters that last box. Until then we'd leave Snapdragon X assumptions where they are and re-check when the court takes up the royalty provision.
What to watch
- How the court handles Qualcomm's argument that a breach lets it stop paying royalties for five years.
- A written ruling or verdict form that explains why jurors set damages at $1 on each of two claims.
- Any post-trial motion or appeal from either company, given that Arm dropped its appeal of the first verdict.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence72
- Adoption
- Not scored
- Hype gap+25
- Incentives70
- Confidence70
Perspective Coverage
6 publishers- Builder
- Builder 24%
- Operator
- Operator 28%
- Investor
- Investor 48%
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
A Delaware federal jury found that Arm breached its licensing agreement with Qualcomm and intentionally interfered with Qualcomm's business relationship with Meta Platforms.
- [2]
Qualcomm is pursuing further arguments over licensing terms and a contractual provision that it says could allow it to stop paying royalties for five years following a breach.
- [3]
The jury awarded Qualcomm just $2 in nominal damages.
- [4]
Both Arm and Qualcomm claimed a measure of victory after the verdict.
- [5]
Arm's shares fell about 1% following the decision.
- [6]
"the jury's verdict confirms that Arm operated in good faith under its technology license agreement"
- [7]
"This outcome is a victory for innovation and competition"
- [8]
Qualcomm had originally sought to avoid paying licensing fees to Arm for five years.
- [9]
The unresolved licensing-term and royalty issues could have greater financial implications than the jury's $2 award.
- [10]
The relationship between Arm and Qualcomm has deteriorated since SoftBank acquired control of Arm in 2016 and Arm expanded into developing its own chips.
- [11]
"we remain focused on developing and delivering industry-leading semiconductor products including our Oryon CPUs"
- [12]
The first Arm v. Qualcomm trial began in December 2024 and ended days later, with a federal jury finding that Qualcomm did not violate its licensing agreement when it acquired Nuvia and created the Oryon-based Snapdragon X chipsets for PCs.
- [13]
Two claims at $1 each equal $2, matching the total award.
- [14]
Arm said the jury ruled in its favor on four claims and awarded Qualcomm $1 in damages for each of the two claims it lost.
- [15]
Qualcomm accused Arm of scuttling a $170 million chip sale to Meta by withholding software, violating pricing structures, and leaking a license-termination warning letter.
- [16]
Arm originally pledged to appeal the first verdict but withdrew its complaints in February 2025.
- [17]
By Arm's count, six claims went to the jury: four it won and two it lost.
- [18]
The $170 million Meta chip sale Qualcomm said Arm scuttled was 85 million times the $2 award.
- [19]
"It's unclear why the damages award was so low"
- [20]
Qualcomm's license runs until 2033.
Sources
5 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- channelnewsasia.comDelaware jury awards Qualcomm $2 in damages, finds Arm breached license agreement
2 articles · October 13, 2026
- news.bloomberglaw.comQualcomm Wins Mixed Jury Verdict in Licensing Feud With Arm (1)
1 article · October 13, 2026
- notebookcheck.netQualcomm beats Arm in court — and wins just $2 - Notebookcheck News
1 article · October 13, 2026
- qz.comJury found Arm breached its license agreement with Qualcomm, awarding $2 in damages
1 article · October 14, 2026
- thurrott.comQualcomm Prevails Against Arm Holdings in Court Again - Thurrott.com
1 article · October 13, 2026
- tomshardware.comQualcomm wins architecture breach verdict against Arm but gets just $2
1 article · October 14, 2026
Topics and entities
Topics
- Arm–Qualcomm litigation
- Semiconductor litigation
Entities
- Qualcomm Oryon CPU
- Qualcomm
- Meta Platforms
- Arm Holdings
- Maryellen Noreika
- SoftBank Group Corp.