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 161.39

-1.9%

Jan 15 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

Lance Bredvold

lml

To: hedgefund who wrote (148856)	9/2/2018 8:20:32 AM
From: JeffreyHF	2 Recommendations of 197227

I haven't read Florian's attached redacted Motion For Partial Summary Judgment yet, but if Koh were to grant it, the chipset licensing aspect of the case would be removed from trial, and established as of the date of her Opinion and Order as a matter of (contract) law. It's the purely contractual aspect that has me concerned. I suppose a review of the FTC Complaint from January 2017 would provide the answer as to whether a pure Breach of Contract case was pled, not only an Anti-trust case, but that begs the question how does such a pure contract case that Florian claims the pending Motion entails, fall within the FTC jurisdiction? The FTC is claiming that there's no genuine issue of material fact existing as to QTL's contractual obligation to offer chipset level licenses to all chipset sellers who request one, and therefore as a matter of law the FTC is entitled to a judgment to that effect, without the need for a trial of the issue.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next