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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: foundation who wrote (13686)	8/7/2001 9:10:47 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 196995

Why would supreme court even want to hear this issue? If open and shut case they will not hear it.

To: foundation who wrote (13686)	8/7/2001 10:46:05 AM
From: M. Charles Swope	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196995

A little more background on the NextWave case. The FCC is arguing that it was not acting as a creditor when it revoked the licenses but as a regulator and, therefore, the bankruptcy law that Ben cites does not apply. Payment of the auction price was a condition of the license, not just a debt owed by NextWave argues the FCC. The Circuit Court rejected this argument. If the Supreme Court takes the case, I believe the nature of the payment obligation and whether characterizing the obligation as regulatory compliance makes a difference will be the issues to be decided. (Please understand, I am not advocating for the FCC's position, just trying to add some further background). Charlie