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.

Non-Tech : The Critical Investing Workshop -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dangergirl who wrote (29682)	8/19/2000 9:10:27 PM
From: Voltaire	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35685

From the valley of the Yahoo. Disclaimer: I have long been LONG on really good BUS seats. The USPTO will also be a "friend of the court;" and, they will be the best BUS witnesses. My former partners - I am retired now - have looked at all of the patents, and read the Hitachi case. They say, IFX is a slamdunk for the BUS. The "DELL decision" is totally offpoint to RMBS v IFX. The BUS may not be able to get a preliminary injunction against shipments of IFX products, but the BUS can force the "fast tracking" of the case. Even if a request for a jury trial is withdrawn, NO judge is going to allow IFX to "steal" from an American company. Some LONGS find it hard to believe that people cannot see the obvious. I suggest that - with the exception of the paid bashers - most of the doubters are just ignorant of the law and the facts of the case as they relate to the law. LONGS should be less "mean" to the naysayers and try to bring them along with the facts. The USPTO will defend their issues with our tax money. They are not going to have their issues overturned under any circumstances. The USPTO's EEs, who reviewed the applications for eight-years, included several PHDs; they know how to read, and they understand the concept of "prior art" better than anyone on any message board. There was NO prior art; that is why the patents issued!!!! There is no "cross-patent" issue in the instant lawsuit. IFX owns no IP that "stepped before" RMBS. RDRAM does not infringe on anything --- except other BUS patents. BUS defenders should not get too wrapped up in the RDRAM v DDR debate; we will ultimately get paid for ALL OF IT. I hope all of us do well next week. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: dangergirl who wrote (29682)	8/19/2000 11:51:55 PM
From: abuelita	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

Jamie Congratulations on being a proud Naples condo owner. That's great. I'm happy for you. Sounds like you're going to be a force to deal with on the links at the next PP. Story for you. Went for a little jog around our community this morning on a pre-determined route that took us past some of the Saturday morning garage sales. Stopped in at one place and picked up a set of ladies golf clubs for five bucks. Hell, nothing was bent or anything. Even came with a bag, and some duplicate clubs. I know, "what's wrong with this picture"? The guy did say that the clubs should be re-gripped. I said, the way I play, forget about it! But, I guess I shouldn't bring them to Goldcreek! Joel wouldn't let me on the course. <vbg> It was fun anyway and I'm gonna take them up to the Queen Charlottes. Nobody will care up there. Good to hear from you again. Take care, rose