Qualcomm also had their own architectural license, but Arm claimed that neither of the 2 licenses is applicable.

I have read at that time the documents presented by both parties, but essential details of the contracts were missing from the public documents, so it was impossible to know which of Qualcomm and Arm was right.

Nevertheless, the argumentation presented by Qualcomm seemed far more plausible, unless it would have been contradicted by some of the redacted out contract details.

Arm has not shown in public any information that could have proven that they are right, so they, or their supporters, may not say that the judge has made a wrong decision.

Supposing that the decision was wrong, Arm has preferred to keep secret their arrangements with the customers, instead of proving that they were right, presumably because they might lose more money if other customers learned the exact details of the contract with Qualcomm, so they could request similar terms.

While I believe that it is right for Qualcomm to have won the trial, I strongly dislike the fact that Qualcomm now designs their own cores instead of licensing them from Arm.

The reason is that the Arm cores have excellent documentation, on par with that of the Intel-AMD CPUs, while the Qualcomm cores, like the Apple cores, have non-existent documentation. Moreover, Qualcomm is so silly that they have always obfuscated even what Arm cores they used in their older products. Whenever I evaluated some smartphone with Qualcomm SoC it was impossible to find any useful information on the Qualcomm site, but I had to go to various third parties to learn what is actually inside the Qualcomm SoC, to be able to compare it with alternatives.

Will they? What kind of breakthrough do you see coming that would convince large actors to make that switch?