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: limtex who wrote (61766)	3/31/2007 12:05:20 AM
From: matherandlowell	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 197315

"you wanna bet on Q's lawyers against NOK?" Maybe its time to buy some Nokia stock? How 'bout some Broadcom? That's the beauty of electronic trading: if you believe that Nokia will get a sustained advantage over its competition by virtue of being able to more effectively steal the Q's IP, buy some stock with a simple click of the mouse. Bet the farm. And while you are at it, take a serious look at BRCM. True, it has a corporate culture of criminality but that might actually serve it well in the American courts. We admire good criminals. While I believe that lawyers are important in winning legal cases, I also believe that underlying facts and the law are important. Lawyers can be slick but the law should not simply be about personalities-- facts and law must come first. True, the jury system may have its faults, but the judges sit on the bench not to reward political favors but to administer justice. Either the facts of QCOM's case are clear and obvious or they are not. If we as biased shareholders perceive the facts differently than an impartial jurist, then we are supporting each other's opinions unrealistically. I have studied the legal questions of this case as carefully as someone with my expertise in law can examine them and I believe I understand the underlying technological issues as carefully as someone with my engineering background can. As I see the situation, it is obvious that Nokia is trying to steal QCOM's IP. The facts are clear. Nokia's ruse about coming up with some additional patents to provide additional power for WCDMA over CDMA will be exposed as the nonsense that it is, if for no other reason than QCOM has always had the CDMA standard lead the way technologically. Sure, a legal triviality could pose a problem in the short term. Over the longer term, I predict QCOM will win on every issue it litigates. Keep in mind that Nokia only has until the end of 2008 to jump around like an adolescent and make idiotic noises and still be able to sign their license option. After that, things are going to get much worse for them. So you could say that the pressure is really on QCOM to win its case against Nokia as soon as possible, but I believe that there is no reasonable way for all the issues to be litigated by the end of 2008. Therefore, at the end of 2008, Nokia will literally have to bet the company that appeals courts will rule that they do not need to pay the Q royalties for the Q's IP. That would be a pretty dumb bet. We always knew the day would come when QCOM's lawyers would have to "make an example" of some company. Too bad it had to be Nokia. Too bad it had to happen right at the year of inflection. Nokia really wants to face the future without EVDO/HSPA patents, without Media Flo offerings? They really think they will be better off competing against Samsung and LG and Motorola without QCOM silicon? Maybe they will and maybe the BRCM executives will be able to continue to rip off the shareholders with cooked options. But I wouldn't bet on it. j.

To: limtex who wrote (61766)	3/31/2007 1:06:42 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197315

Sorry but if Q's brilliant legal team managed to get the result they did against BRCM just wait till they have to face a giant like NOK They sued Broadcom over video compression patents. Is that why you invested in Qualcomm....because of their H.264 patents? The fact that they lost that case will have little to no bearing on their ability to win a WCDMA patent suit against Nokia. Slacker