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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8672)	8/29/2006 12:03:52 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217661

Only 91 pages. NOK owes QCOM big time. GSM handset sellers have to pay QCOM the royalty, says QCOM: edisweb.usitc.gov <Here, Nokia’s “estoppel” defense meets exactly that description. This is true for a host of reasons detailed more fully in Section 1II.A. 1 below, not the least of which is that Nokia, a sophisticated company whose GSM handset sales garner the vast majority of its revenues, claims that the parties’ pre-contract negotiations led Nokia to reasonably infer, without asking, without checking, without being told so by QUALCOMM, [ 3, that QUALCOMM would never assert any of its patents against any Nokia GSM product. Nokia’s “estoppel” argument is untenable on its face, and is rendered even more so by its admission that, [> This should be a LOT of fun. Meanwhile, I hope you are enjoying your QUALCOMM phone. Mqurice