SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation
WDC 160.09+1.9%11:49 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Artslaw who wrote (8036)11/8/1999 11:48:00 PM
From: John Stichnoth  Read Replies (1) of 60323
 
If it does open down like that, it would be a huge buying opportunity, imo. The patent in question is not important to Sandisk or the development of flash. And, as Ausdauer has noted, the ruling does nothing to show that Sandisk has infringed. The issue was simply whether Lexar has a patent at all. They do. So? That doesn't mean that Sandisk has violated that patent. That question was apparently not even a part of that case.

I have posted the abstracts for the two patents in post 8029, upstream. Read them. It seems pretty clear to me that Lexar's is for a specific behavior of storing information in flash, while SNDK's is for flash itself. The SNDK patent is more central.

And this is borne out by the number of references made to it in other patents. No one has bothered to reference the Lexar patent, but Sandisk's has been referenced 26 times.

Best,
JS
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News