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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
QCOM 159.42-1.2%Jan 16 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: carranza2 who wrote (61441)3/24/2007 2:28:27 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (2) of 197271
 
C2, whether some lawyers hid some evidence illegally or not has got nothing to do with whether QUALCOMM is infringing on a Broadcom patent and should be banned from importing the affected products.

The consequence of lawyers doing things like that should be like Martha Stewart going to prison not for insider trading, but for lying about it. And Bill Clinton being impeached, not for messing up a blue dress and misusing cigars but for lying to an entity to which lies were illegal.

The judge should fine the lawyers $100,000 for evidentiary misdemeanours of felonious intent. That shouldn't form part of the case to show QUALCOMM infringed a patent.

People are convicted or perjury. It's a separate crime from the trial at issue.

We are discussing the emails as though their disclosure is the issue, rather than the content.

Which is not to say that it helps QUALCOMM's case. When one finds one is dealing with hagfish slimeballs, one assumes that the character trait is continuous, and it usually is. But the emails business looks like a minor procedural mistake rather than malign intention to be cleverly manipulative. I'm sure you know how many emails there are swooping around in hard drives. It's not as though they had a corpse hidden in a cupboard.

Mqurice
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext