The New QUALCOMM - Coming Into Buy Range 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 : The New QUALCOMM - Coming Into Buy Range

QCOM 177.78

-2.2%

Jan 9 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: slacker711 who wrote (826)	8/15/2007 7:33:54 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) of 9132

that they must have believed that their was no legal requirement for them to do so as long as they didnt actively participate (or they never would have had engineers at the meeting). Unfortunately, Brewster disagrees with that interpretation of their obligations.... I doubt that was the case. Not only was the obligation to disclose well known b/c it was read before the start of any meeting, the duty is made clear in the ITU's policy statements. Case law and public policy have also had an impact on the amount of IPR disclosed in the standard–setting process. The two most important cases were the FTC’s antitrust actions against Dell and Rambus, and a great deal has been written about each of them. The central message of both cases is that firms that fail to disclose their intellectual property, or worse attempt to manipulate the disclosure process, may forfeit their property rights. firstmonday.org An IPR powerhouse like Q knows these elementary principles. The only reasonable conclusion is that it decided in this case to ignore them. It seems likely that Q did not seek to establish a strategic IPR advantage after the standard was finalized because it probably realized that it had run afoul of the disclosure requirements. Seeking to assert IPR rights after the standard had been set would have meant that Q would run into a buzz saw of opposition. My guess is that it concluded that no good purpose was served by asserting them. It made an exception as regards BRCM, however. While it is clear that Q did not play the hold-up game with the industry as a whole, it obviously did attack BRCM, perhaps thinking that a victory over BRCM might lead to industry capitulation. This, if true, was a terrible lapse of judgment on Q's part. I suspect that the bitterness of the fight with BRCM has a lot to do with Q's loss of perspective.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next