Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) 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 Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 146.57

-4.0%

12:04 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: rkral who wrote (144529)	8/25/2006 4:57:44 PM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (1) of 152472

>>Uncanny!<< Yes, and the board has been through all this and I have to believe that QCOM knows these rules far better than anyone including the writer. What weakens the article as a pertinent point is that QCOM disclosed the GSM IPR usage and has been in talks with Nokia for sometime over its license obligation. Also, in all of Nokia's counter charges they have not (to my knowledge) claimed patent ambush. Also, if Nokia had a clear case of patent ambush or any other abuse by QCOM they would not be pushing for arbitration. Using IDCC as a case of Nokia's past MO for arbitration suggests that Nokia knows they are liable, but wants some kind of compromise short of the one Jim proposes.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next