SI
SI
discoversearch

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: carranza2 who wrote (149222)4/5/2007 1:34:33 PM
From: seti  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 

Boneheaded, actually.

No court will ever hold that paying a penny on a dollar before infringing will immunize the infringer from a claim of willfulness and the trebling of damages that such willful infringing brings with it. Otherwise, the trebling statute would be worthless. Every willful infringer will, like NOK, pay a pittance to set the terms of its own license.

It was stupid, arrogant, and a sign of weakness and desperation.


Um ... then why did Nokia do it?
Really. It's hard to believe Nokia and their lawyers are THAT stupid.



To: carranza2 who wrote (149222)4/5/2007 1:37:51 PM
From: rkral  Respond to of 152472
 
"No court will ever hold that paying a penny on a dollar before infringing will immunize ..."

I agree, but you're exaggerating a bit. I think it's somewhere between 'a penny on a nickel' and 'a penny on a dime'.



To: carranza2 who wrote (149222)4/5/2007 1:40:19 PM
From: manalagi  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Thanks C2 for your legal point of view.

Is it just walking out from a department with a dress and dropping 50 cents, and claiming that it is not shoplifting?


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News