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 : QUALCOMM-The Wireless Wonder in 1999

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: GO*QCOM who wrote (159)3/28/2000 12:17:00 PM
From: GO*QCOM  Read Replies (1) of 343
 
Qualcomm, Motorola Agree To Settle

SAN DIEGO (AP) - Qualcomm Inc. (NasdaqNM:QCOM - news) and Motorola Inc. (NYSE:MOT - news) said Tuesday they've agreed to dismiss all lawsuits against each other over the design of mobile phones that use Qualcomm's wireless technology format.

The deal ends a series of patent infringement claims the companies have leveled against each other since March 1997.

The two companies also have agreed to a three-year moratorium on patent infringement lawsuits related to the fast-growing Qualcomm technology known as CDMA, or code division multiple access.

Speak your mind
Discuss this story with other people.
[Start a Conversation]
(Requires Yahoo! Messenger)

No payments are being made under the dismissal agreement, San Diego-based Qualcomm said in a press release.

The dispute included a claim that Qualcomm illegally copied the look of Motorola's popular StarTac model for Qualcomm's 5-ounce ``Q' phones.

The Qualcomm phone was similar in terms of its size, clamshell shape and the positioning of the handset's antenna, battery and keypad.

But there were several differences: The StarTac's ``send' and ``end' keys are laid out differently than on the Q phone, which also had e-mail and other Internet features.

A federal judge ruled in favor of Qualcomm in August 1999, saying the Q phone's design was original. But Motorola, based in Schaumburg, Ill., continued to pursue other non-patent claims despite the judgement.  
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext