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 159.83-1.0%2:32 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
Fiero
Lance Bredvold
VinnieBagOfDonuts
To: Qurious who wrote (148940)9/5/2018 4:00:13 PM
From: slacker7113 Recommendations   of 197234
 
The only reason it could claim the exclusion order served the public interest was because the order forced Q to settle, and settle promptly.

If the ITC had been only interested in forcing a settlement, a total ban would have worked better than the limited exclusion order that was given. The ban they handed down was fairly clever in that it balanced the public interest with Broadcom's interest with the impact of the exclusion order getting larger and larger over time.

So yes, I expect that a finding of infringement will get Qualcomm some form of exclusion order that would help force Apple to the table. I think that will fall short of a total ban though. If the judge did give a complete ban, I would wager quite a bit against it surviving both the Commission and the President.

and of course, the odds are that the day after any exclusion order goes into effect, Apple/Intel will announce a work around which will force Q to go to court to prove that the work around still violates their patents.


This is more about leverage in settlement negotiations than anything else.

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