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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GO*QCOM who wrote (33997)	7/4/1999 1:12:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

GQ - to wether the disputed patent is involved structurally in the CDMA ASIC.I doubt QUALCOMM would have done this just on the basis of risk. I'd be very very surprised if the disputed 'technology' were hardwired. It is almost certainly in software since it is exactly the kind of thing software is good for (two or three if-then-else's). However, just because it is in software doesn't mitigate the problem if the patent is held valid. Off hand I cannot think of any other way to prioritize carriers and communicate it to the user. As for risk, IMHO, the only real risk here is lawyer costs and possibly the perception of the doofusses on WS. Of course GTE is not the spin machine expert that Ericsson is. Clark PS People take patents too seriously. A patent, as an ex-parte (one-sided) document, is not a particularly strong piece of paper by itself. Each patent needs to be judged on its own merits and this one is very very weak.