The 6.1-billion yuan ($975 million) fine imposed by the National Development and Reform Commission on chipmaker Qualcomm Technologies Inc for violating the anti-monopoly law is the highest on any company on the Chinese mainland. It ends a 14-month government investigation into the company's practices in the marketplace. But what are the highlights of the case?

What is especially noteworthy is that the case creates a more just and sustainable environment for the global mobile phone industry and its consumers. It has broken the "patent shackles" set by Qualcomm.

In past years, Qualcomm has collected royalties calculated on the full price of the selling price of phones, including the screen, shell, batteries, cameras, earphones and even the inlaid diamond. So China's 3G mobile phone manufacturers had to pay half of their profits to Qualcomm.

This has increased the prices of 3G mobile phones from 200 yuan to 300 yuan, while Qualcomm made 49 percent of the its revenue from Chinese marketplace and its profits reached 60 percent.

China made 81 percent of the world's mobile phones in 2013. Other Western multinational giants were keen to copy the Qualcomm mode, which has become a "patent shackle" preventing the sustainable development of the global mobile phone industry.

The second important focus is the response of Qualcomm and the capital market to the ruling. The heavy fine has undoubtedly reduced its profits, but it has nevertheless announced its intention to expand its investment in China. Meanwhile, its stocks have seen a rapid rise. This shows that China's domestic market and the huge size of the Chinese industry have provided China with a strong bargaining position. Both the capital market players and Qualcomm policymakers recognize this power.

It also indicates that China did not see the antitrust investigation as a protectionist weapon to exclude foreign companies from the Chinese market, but as a tool to maintain market order with the aim of achieving a win-with situation between foreign firms and their Chinese counterparts.

The author is Mei Xinyu, a researcher of International Trade and Economic Cooperation in the Ministry of Commerce.

This article was edited and translated from 《高通反垄断案的两大看点》, source: People's Daily Overseas Edition