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: Clarksterh who wrote (15635)	9/28/1998 2:42:00 PM
From: mmeggs	Read Replies (2) of 152472

I respectfully disagree. If I were in ERICY's position I would think that more I debated with and gave attention to Qualcomm, the more credence I would give their position. I would therefore acknowledge the claims, respectfully deny them, and shift the focus to the fantastic, revolutionary, one-of-a-kind, unique solution to 3G known as W-CDMA. That is, if I REALLY felt like the position was strong. If it wasn't that strong, I couldn't do the above. Besides, no one has answered the other questions: 1. Why offer to trade for patents you don't need and 2. Why bring all kinds of pressure to bear onto Q to give up IPR that is irrelevant? meggs

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next