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: rkral who wrote (144554)	8/28/2006 2:04:10 AM
From: lml	Respond to of 152472

"Seems to me that since Q sued NOK on 11/4/2005 on this matter, the latest revision to the ETSI Policy is likely an effect rather than a cause of the litigation." "That is highly unlikely. Firstly, there were only 19 calendar days between the date of the suit and endorsement of the changes "by the ETSI General Assembly on 23 November 2005"." My inference to the relationship b/w Q's suit against NOK & the revision to the ETSI policy was not that the former preceded the other by a matter of days, but rather THE ISSUE being debated, presence of previously undiscovered an essential IPR in the GSM/GPRS/EDGE standard, likely came to light to Q & NOK first, & as a result, an effort ensued to revise ETSI policy to avoid such disputes in the future. Again, my hypothesis is that the litigation regarding this matter is likely the impetus behind the revision . . . & not the other way around, which was where this discussion was going before I "chimed in."