Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) 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 Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 163.32

+2.3%

Nov 21 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rajala who wrote (15629)	9/28/1998 2:00:00 PM
From: mmeggs	Read Replies (2) of 152472

Rajala, that still leaves a couple questions unanswered. 1. Why the offer to trade patents? Or the implied offer to pay "low" royalties? Is this because ERICY has a big heart? They think Dr. Jacobs is a swell guy? 2. Why does nearly every statement regarding W-CDMA contain a denial that Q IPR is infringed? 3. Why is Q being harassed and pressured to give up the IPR (for "reasonable" royalties) if no one really thinks it is needed for W-CDMA anyway? I see what you're saying in that E would need to make some kind of statement regarding Q's IPR involvement - denying it. But if they really felt their position was that strong, wouldn't they just deny it and move on? Why engage in the argument at all if you feel their is no argument? mmeggs

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next