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 174.69

0.0%

Dec 24 12:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: hedgefund who wrote (62030)	4/9/2007 10:02:49 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) of 197030

I don't think Nokia made the payment to avoid an injunction; I think it paid in an effort to reduce damages.<i/> I agree. I don't think they're unilateral tender of payment of a portion of what is owed, based upon prior performance by the parties, completely insulates them from willful infringement. I think your analysis/conclusion holds a lotta merit given that an injunction is unlikely to issue, & damages will be trebled if & when this matter is adjudicated in a court of law. On the other hand, if this matter is settled b/w the parties, I would suspect damages to be less than if awarded by a court. Either way, NOK is at risk by virtue of their actions to continue to use Q's IP and failure to pay the agreed-upon royalty rates established under the expired licensing agreement. I kinda view NOK's payment as a "buy down" on the full damage award that is likely to be hanging over them for the next 18 months.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next