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: Lynn Goodman who wrote (28809)	7/25/2000 6:20:53 PM
From: kumar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

<<arms length>> whilst I have no legal background, I think what QCOM/Spinco is planning, is legally do-able, because the patents are owned "effectively jointly" by both companies. They might have some doc that spells out "who owns which patents" at IPO time, and then have a "cross licencing contract" at whatever $ value they choose (such as $0). This is how I believe it works in the HWP/A case. which is how A could develop the "photonic switch" using patented inkjet technology, without forking out $s for it. cheers, kumar

To: Lynn Goodman who wrote (28809)	7/25/2000 7:46:27 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

Lynn, Q will give preferential treatment to Spinco (eg, no royalty fees). ... The anticompetitive issue, if it exists I wonder if that is part of the reason Spinco will get a licensing "credit" from Qualcomm in return for royalties. That establishes that a transaction has taken place. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm doing some WAG here. --Mike Buckley

To: Lynn Goodman who wrote (28809)	7/25/2000 8:27:14 PM
From: DownSouth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Lynn, there is a quid pro quo in the QCOM/SPINCO relationship that keeps the lawyers happy. That is, SPINCO uses QCOM's IPR in exchange for QCOM having access ot SPINCO's new inventions. As Merlin pointed out, they start this relationship with SPINCO having "credits" for royalties that it would otherwise pay. These credits accrue, I believe, as QCOM takes advantage of new IPR invented by SPINCO in the years ahead. How does that sound to you, esquire?