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: matherandlowell who wrote (61360)	3/23/2007 12:18:25 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197227

Common law: <What law requires adherence to unwritten expectations? > Which is also unwritten. New Zealand doesn't even have a written constitution. An oral contract is still a contract. Unspoken words are enough. Common practise in the absence of any words at all is enough. Writing was invented long after lawyers were in business being cunning, manipulative, dishonest, annoying, expensive, belligerent, self-important, litigious, unco-operative, disputatious, self-dealing, unethical, cruel and stupid. I remember thinking that the comment "It's all upside" sounded absurd. If I remember rightly, that comment was wrong. There is plenty of downside. But on reflection, maybe the upside cases were those which were tossed aside recently as being a bad idea. It looks as though QCOM's lawyers are being really clever, cunning and manipulative. Being really boring and simply doing things straight, simple and honest is anathema to plenty of people. They feel they aren't getting enough of an edge. Look at the telecom companies for example and their marketing plans. Look at the wreckage of Globalstar - that was really clever too. They couldn't figure out to just stack it high and sell it cheap. They had to be tricky and greedy. I hasten to add I'm not racist against lawyers. Heck, some of my best friends are lawyers. Tortious lawyers are an exception. Criminal lawyers are dodgy too. In fairness to the lawyers, I can't tell that a particularly bad job has been done so far. It might be that QCOM has simply got some things wrong and some employees have made some mistakes, attended SETI meetings without taking the caring and sharing approach seriously enough. Often people treat standard commentaries in an offhand way "Yeah, yeah, let's get on with it". There are so many rules these days for everything that I defy anybody to comply with them. It's impossible to know even a fraction of them. And they are "technical" rules that one can't know intuitively by adopting good character behaviour. One could prune a tree in New Zealand and go to prison. Seriously! Though they would probably be lenient if one could prove that one didn't know there is a tree religion with Sharia law. I would rather insult a Maori or Muhammed and Muhammad than hurt a totara tree [but I wouldn't give cheek to Mohamed or Mohammed - apparently that's a real no-no]. Mqurice