Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting

QCOM 180.90

+2.1%

Oct 31 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: waitwatchwander who wrote (57671)	12/12/2006 9:32:25 PM
From: quartersawyer	Read Replies (1) of 196395

Damien Geradin's paper -- FRAND and thoroughly good sense Two snips: 1) The only material consequence of making a FRAND commitment is that the patent holder waives its right to refuse to engage in good faith negotiations to lic ense. FRAND commitments do not impose any form of price control on the licensor, nor an obligation to license on disadvantageous conditions. On the contrary, FRAND means that royalty rates should be determined through fair, bilateral negotiations in accordance with market conditions. [pp 4,5] 2)[wrt proposals to amend FRAND toward more rigid patent pooling, capping, and proportionality of essential patents ]: ....moreover, such a proposed system would be both unfair and unreasonable. Companies with large patent portfolios would capture the greatest royalty earnings notwithstanding the actual value of their patents, even if those patents did not require nearly the same level of investment as the one made by other firms. Meanwhile, companies with perhaps a smaller number of more valuable patents would receive a smaller return. This would result in prices being unfair and unrelated to the true value of the patent. In the end, this rule would encourage an absurd proliferation of patents being contributed to a standard and declared as essential regardless of their innovative or commercial value. Each company participating in standard setting would have a strong incentive to maximize the number of patents that it files and contributes, rather than the quality of the innovation. [p 15] tilburguniversity.nl Probably not even a Qualcomm consultant...Biography of the author: professorgeradin.blogs.com oops: yes he is

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next