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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BDAZZ who wrote (144536)	8/25/2006 6:20:46 PM
From: rkral	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Nokia's estoppel defense It's hard to pick the most pertinent sentences, but I'll go with these ... "Nokia's estoppel defense is "related to" the 2001 Areement in two important respects. First, the events giving rise to the estoppel defense occurred during the negotiation and performance of the 2001 Agreement. The 2001 Agreement was intended to establish "patent peace' between the parties for all patents in their respective portfolios at that time. During the negotiations, Qualcomm was clearly aware of each of the patents it now asserts in this action." edisweb.usitc.gov (pg. 18) I had to laugh out loud at this quote from another case ... "Where there is "clear and unmistakable evidence' that the parties intended to arbitrate the issue of arbitrability, "a court must defer to an arbitrator's arbitrability decision."" (pg. 15) ... because it sounded like "a fox guarding the henhouse" scenario.