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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan3 who wrote (143156)	9/9/2001 2:08:12 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, in terms of S3, any patents that were once argued in court, and followed by an out of court settlement, cannot be brought back as evidence, AFAIK. In terms of Intergraph, what do they have to do with the VIA/Intel case? And, supposing that they do have a case, why isn't it in the news more? I'd say the possibility of Intel losing out to $100 billion in damages, if true, would be much more newsworthy than a patent war with rival VIA. Yet I haven't seen more than the Huntsville Times cover the Intergraph story recently. wanna_bmw

To: Dan3 who wrote (143156)	9/9/2001 11:50:03 PM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re:"The bottom line is, there are [Via] patents that Intel is having some trouble with." Oh really !! Then why don't you just identify 1 or 2 of these patents so we can go look at them. It is very strange that Via did not identify any of these patents when it was getting its butt kicked in the last Intel law suit. Instead it waved the white flag and paid Intel some $$$. All Via had to do was ask you for the patents "that Intel is having some trouble with". No need for expensive lawyers, just ask Blow Hard Dan.