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: Ruffian who wrote (23120)	2/19/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) of 152472

If Ericsson had legitimate claims against cdmaOne, could not Ericsson have filed a motion for preliminary injunction? Michael, remember when Rotamola asked for a preliminary injunction for QCOM to stop selling the Q phone based on alleged design infringement? I recall the Judge laughed that request right out of the courtroom. Perhaps ERICY has avoided the same fate by not asking for anything? In my opinion yet more evidence that this ERICY suit isn't worth the paper it's written on. Second thought I'll take that back, perhaps QCOM's counter-suit (which I believe derives some of it's merit from the ERICY suit)could be a real windfall for Qualcomm if they can show how ERICY's statements and actions have hurt the Q. I imagine the counter-suit and the lawsuit will be heard concurrently. Wouldn't this mean the jurors will hear alot of evidence about ERICY's misrepresentations and slimeball tactics? The jurors will have to make a decision at some point and it seems if QCOM attorneys do their job, ERICY will have a noticeable odor by the midpoint of the trial.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next