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 : Ericsson overlook? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: vpelt who wrote (3933)	2/13/2000 1:32:00 AM
From: w molloy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5390

Do you know enough about the two suits that would suggest IDC has a case against ERICY it didn't against MOT? The biggest difference between the two suits is that the ERICY suit will be a Markham hearing. The MOT suit was a jury trial, and some pundits think that the jury mishandled the case. In a Markham case, the evidence is presented to an expert and he/she instructs the jury. I've looked at the main IDC TDMA patent and it looks compelling. IMO The case outcome will rest on a priori evidence, and I'm not going to research that area. I will let ERICY's attorney's do that. w.

To: vpelt who wrote (3933)	2/13/2000 6:47:00 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5390

Dear Vpelt: To be honest, when the patent suit was first disclosed I noted that IDC did in fact lose a similar suit against MOT and as you indicated in an earlier post went into the APATHY mode. So I have made no attempt to try and learn more about it. Like you, I am all ears, but my gut feeling is ERICY would not have used patented technology that is "basic" to their needs illegally. I think they are a lot smarter then that. But, willing to listen to others as to this situation. JDN