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 155.82

-1.3%

Jan 23 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Q8tfreebe who wrote (59183)	1/26/2007 6:59:38 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) of 197362

For Nok to get an injunction against QCOM, they will first have to prove QCOM infringed on thier IPR, this will take time, particularly given the likely appeals process. In fact, on the last earnings call (immediately prior to Wednesday's) Lupin expressly stated that QCOM has always maintained that it doesn't use NOK IPR. Whether true or not, it leaves NOK in the position of having to prove QCOM is infringing. Lupin has stated that a preliminary injunction is very unlikely so I expect it will take a year or so for either side to work through the ITC process and get an injunction. I have very little doubt that Nokia has IP in HSDPA/WCDMA/EDGE/GPRS/GSM. On the other hand, Lupin claims that NOK has publically stated that it uses QCOM's IPR (but just doesn't like the price it has to pay). Therefore, it should be easier and quicker for QCOM to prove NOK is infringing and hense, secure an injunction. IMO, this has become an urban legend on the thread. I dont believe that saying that Qualcomm is required to offer FRAND'ly terms is the same as saying that they are infringing. Slacker

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next