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 182.40

+3.5%

Jan 6 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

Lance Bredvold

VinnieBagOfDonuts

To: Qurious who wrote (148915)	9/4/2018 6:44:29 PM
From: slacker711	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 197106

(a) why would Intel lose the iphone socket if there's an exclusion order? The remedy to the exclusion order is a simple agreement to pay Q for use of its IP. In the forgettable Q v. BRCM episode, did BRCM not also seek an exclusion order on Q silicon? And was Q not forced to pay (and back pay) until Q can design around BRCM's IP? Paying for the IP isnt Intel's decision but Apple's. One argument for the limited impact of an iPhone exclusion order is that Apple could simply choose to sell Qualcomm based iPhones....at least for the pre-2018 iPhones that are the units under review. Broadcom only received a very limited exclusion order because of the public interest. (b) even if Intel loses the iphone socket, why would that knock them out of 5G? Mediatek et al do not have the iphone socket. But they manage to stay in the 5G race; Intel argues that they have no other mobile chipset revenue. So losing that revenue and also losing the advantage of incumbency at Apple would doom their 5G efforts. They have failed a half dozen times over the last decade so I sort of doubt that they abandon their efforts now, but who knows? (c) and why would this exclusion order be of public interest? There are plenty of viable alternatives to the iphone on the market. Neither the courts nor USITC has any obligation to protect an infringing company from suffering adverse effects of such infringements. If the ITC actually granted a total exclusion order against all 2018 iPhones, then I would argue that there would be a substantial impact to the public. Total handset sales in the US would drop dramatically. Slacker

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next