Compaq Message Board - Msg: 14838574

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 : Compaq

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Night Writer who wrote (86973)	11/18/2000 9:18:04 AM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (1) of 97611

NW - this looks like a typical "go after the money" lawsuit. CPQ did not produce any MPEG software - even the MPEG drivers provided with Presarios and laptops are third party, clearly labeled as such, with separate licensing terms for the package. Some bright lawyer at one of those companies got an idea on how to make some money and picked the #1 company to go after. Since CPQ routinely does indemnification and "hold harmless" clauses on all licensing - as do all the big boys - the lawyers must assume they will run through whatever money a small company has and then CPQ's indemnification will not protect them. But I would expect that they also have a limited liability, since the SW is given away free and there are many versions in the common domain. Also, the standardization of MPEG compression is common domain. This is certainly very strange legal action. If these people are successful in showing that they have some royalty rights on a particular method of compression, all they will do is drive the industry to develop a different compression method.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next