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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jjayxxxx who wrote (54334)	9/10/2001 12:32:05 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Respond to of 275872

JJ, Re: "In the first case, you say Intel has clearly shown what patents are being violated, and therefore they have the better case. But later, you say that "Intel hasn't felt the need to say anything" and therefore must have the better case. Which is it: Intel saying something or not? Good or bad? Can't have it both ways and be good for each case, unless you apply the same rules to Via." Other than the deposition, Intel hasn't made any public announcements. VIA has, and they've gone so far as to offer opinions on that matter... usually a no-no in court cases. Just look at some of the quotes that the press has taken from them. They seem like the poor little puppy that's getting bullied around. That may be the case, but you're sure not going to get an unbiased perspective by only listening to VIA's side of it. "I happen to agree that what you are saying will likely unfold, however, I just think it is way too soon to pronounce anything as a "clear indication" without more real information." I have not mentioned anything about a "clear indication". I use words like "inclined", "possibly", and "probably" for a reason. There is nothing absolute about it, except for what my gut tells me. wanna_bmw