Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: red jinn who wrote (3253)	6/28/1999 10:13:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 54805

To Red Jinn: Suggest you post your msg on Q thread and let the lawyers and experts deal with it. You may well be right and the case you make seems reasonable and close to what I understand. But I am not a lawyer, let alone a patent lawyer. Those who are on the Q thread seem to think the Q has found a perfectly legal way to include language in their license agreements with each individual licensee which is enforceable and binding - protecting the Q well into the future.. Good luck among the Q patent experts. Best. Cha2

To: red jinn who wrote (3253)	6/29/1999 1:05:00 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

red jinn, Speaking of patents ... There's this little company called Gemstar. :) There's also a little company called TV Guide. Gemstar has some patented technology for electronic program guides used in televisions. Mangement thinks TV Guide is using some of Gemntar's technology without permission. There are some bigger companies called Scientific Atlanta and General Instrument. They make set-top boxes. Gemstar thinks the two companies are putting TV Guide's products which use Gemstar's technologies in their set-top boxes. There are also some cable and wireless companies that provide programming. When they buy the set-top boxes to re-sell (or rent) to their customers, they decide which electronic program guides go in their set-top boxes. Some folks have recently decided that it might be possible for the set-top box manufacturers to avoid legal hassles regarding the alleged patent infringements if they wait for the cable and wireless programmers to decide which products go in the boxes. The thinking is that the cable and wireless programmers can be subject to viable lawsuits in that situation, not the set-top box manufacturers. Under typical patent law, is that reasonably possible? --Mike Buckley P. S. Gemstar, a W&W portfolio member, is only up 108% this year. Still watching and waiting. :) P. P. S. If Stew corrects any of my assumptions, go with his scenario. He knows more about this stuff than I do.