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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quidditch who wrote (603)	8/5/1999 10:08:00 PM
From: Brihack	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13582

Steven, all: Sometime back JGoren expressed some interest in the contents of the Q complaint filed July 20 against Motorola. As a longterm Q holder, I was also interested and, since I work in the area, checked out the paperwork in the District Court in San Diego. Here is my summary of the pleading for anyone interested: The suit is captioned "Declaratory Relief Regarding Termination of Patent License Agreement." It seeks a finding by the court that: 1) Q is entitled to terminate its license to Mot under the Patent License Agreement (PLA) due to Mot's breach; and 2) after terminating Q's license to Mot, Mot's manufacture and sale of its existing wireless products formerly licensed under the PLA will infringe certain Q patents. The complaint includes some history of the relationship between Q and Mot: The PLA was entered into on September 26, 1990 and concerned 11 specified patents for DS-CDMA. The PLA also involved cross-licensing any patents (in addition to their own) that either company had the right to license which are "technically or commercially necessary" to make and sell certain CDMA and Dual-Mode wireless products. In Nov '95, Mot acquired from Telular the right to sublicense certain Telular patents that Tel and Mot claim are technically and commercially necessary and essential to make and sell WLL products using CDMA. Mot repeatedly refused to grant Q a Tel sublicense and in early '97 Mot sued Q for patent infringement. Q's position: all Mot patents are licensed to Q under the PLA and Mot is estopped from asserting such infringement claims against Q. Q further contends that Mot breached the PLA by 1)filing the infringement claims, and 2) refusing to grant Q sublicenses to the Tel patents. Q contends that under the PLA, it is entitled to terminate the licenses and rights it granted to Mot ("while retaining the licenses and rights granted by Mot to Q") if: 1) Mot breaches; 2) Q notifies Mot of the breach; and 3) Mot fails to cure the breach. Q claims that it notified Mot but failed to cure for over 2 years i.e. didn't dismiss the infringement case and didn't grant Q sublicenses to the Tel patents. On July 19, '99, Q notified Mot of its intent to terminate the PLA and advised that Mot's continued sale of any CDMA-based wireless products would infringe Q's patents. Such wireless products include: a) subscriber units:Star-Tac ST-7760 and Micro-Tac SC-725; b) components (ASICS; c) infrastructure/base stations; and d)test equipment. Note that the PLA expressly calls for application of California law and provides that the prevailing party can recover its attorney fees from the non-prevailing party ("loser"). No mention of Mot failing to "mark" its phones with "Technology by Q" or references to Mot playing games with alternative chips sources. An attachment to the suit lists 19 specific patents, if anyone is interested. No much else of interest in the attachments, although the original file has been "in chambers" quite a bit over the last two weeks. Hope this (rough) summary is of some interest to some folks. BriHack P.S. I'm a new poster, fairly longtime lurker on the Q threads, but have held Q since the IPO on advice from a friend/Q employee that the stock "might really go someday"...Its been a heck of a ride!