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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (56476)	10/31/2006 11:00:06 AM
From: Jim Mullens	Respond to of 196781

Slacker, Re: QCOM v BRCM- Q PR and >> “think that Broadcom's PR more accurately describes the judges decision than Qualcomm's. Jim came away from Q's comments thinking that there was going to be an injunction against Broadcom selling WCDMA chipsets. That isnt the case” I now agree that my take after reading the Q PR was incorrect and that this injunction does NOT bar BRCM from selling WCDMA chipsets. Not being a “legalie” (nor a techie) I was mistaken (mislead, probably ??). Thanks to several off board discussions -- I “think” I understand what the Q PR is stating / attempted to state. + Q “recently” discovered that BRCM somehow acquired QCOM WCDMA source code, etc during a time when BRCM coincidentally was developing its WCDMA baseband. + The preliminary junction bars BRCM from using such source code, etc. to develop/ sell any products, + BRCM agrees with the injunction, that it would be improper to use such source code, etc. in developing their WCDMA products. + However, BRCM states that its WCDMA products were not developed using such source code. + The trial in Oct 2007 is to determine if BRCM’s products use the Q’s source code, etc. and infringe upon the Q’s IPR. The wording in the Q’s PR suggests that BRCM somehow acquired the Q’s WCDMA propriety documents, apparently via illegal means. ---- “any further solicitation / use...” ---, it appears that the court must have been convinced that BRCM at least was / is in procession of the Q’s WCDMA propriety documents. Upon further thought, although not apart of the current action, one would think the Q should have mentioned in that PR that BRCM does not have a QCOM license and would further violate its IPR by selling any WCDMA products.