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 148.83

+1.1%

Feb 4 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: JeffreyHF who wrote (61332)	3/22/2007 5:40:08 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (2) of 197563

It was a stupid case to bring, where those patents had never been licensed to anyone before, and Qualcomm was only asking for $8.5 million dollars. Then it was mishandled. Now Broadcom is crowing about a pattern of standards abuse, as if Qualcomm failed to disclose its air interface technologies. The market and public won`t understand, so perhaps billions will be taken from the market cap, and other courts and the ITC will read of Qualcomm`s abusive misconduct. Credibility is crucial, and it was sacrificed for no good reason, and without reasonable upside. The big question is how is Q's non disclosure of these patents any different than their non-disclosure of the GPRS/EDGE patents? On the bright side, it does seem that these patents are essential to the H.264 standard and that the judge is considering just having an automatic inclusion in the patent pool. Still wouldnt be worth the damage to Q's reputation though. Slacker

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next