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 174.23

-0.6%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (22478)	5/11/2002 1:02:05 PM
From: saukriver	Read Replies (1) of 197014

The Informant I don't see legally how manufactures can collude to fix IPR prices at 5% ASP. When this idea was first floated three years ago it was pointed out that the patent pool scheme could run afoul of U.S. anti-trust and EU competition laws. An industry trust to set and fix IPR prices could be illegal. I reccommend "The Informant" by Kurt Eichenwald of the NYT. amazon.com Better reading than anything John Grisham has done. It explains how the government's relation to its cooperating witness in the ADM-lysine price fixing investigation and trial. Eichenwald is now covering Andersen and Enron for the NYT. I concur that a collective agreement to set a cap on prices should run into U.S. anti-trust problems were it not for the fact that each company (other than NOK) might contribute technology to the pool from which they would draw.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next