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: Jim Lurgio who wrote (42538)	9/26/1999 11:40:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Jim - One witness stated that yes prior art was involved . He or she then stated although the wheel and the engine existed as well as various other parts did not the Wright brothers invent the airplane ? Of course you are right, it is a matter of degree. A simplified version of the process to determine if a patent in validly infringed is: 1) Look at the intersection of the patent and the alleged infringement. 2) Is this prior art? If so there is not likely to be a judgement of infringement. 3) Is this obvious given the state of prior art? If so, then again there is not likely to be a judgement of infringement. My opinion is that for GSM it is very unlikely that infringement with 089 will be found, and for NA-TDMA the chances are considerably better, but still not great. But I concede that there is a fair amount of uncertainty in this since I don't know the precise state of the art back in '88. This is, of course, purely my opinion. FWIW. Clark