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: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (62258)	4/9/2007 11:55:24 AM
From: JGoren	Respond to of 197031

I agree, Art. We have been doing too much speculation because we don't know what's in the license agreements. I think the best thing we can do is try to watch the pleadings as they become available and hopefully they will shed some light on what is really going on. Of course, the public filings often delete the confidential material, so we may not be able to get a better handle on it. We're just gonna have to trust the Company's lawyers. And, if there is a settlement (eventually), we probably will never know.

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (62258)	4/9/2007 9:03:08 PM
From: masa	Respond to of 197031

"Masa, you're assuming all Nokia's patent claims are valid" No, I am not. But definitely there is that "one claim in one patent" that is valid, which is enough for injunction. Just like I believe, QCOM has that. Now: the whole point is: I am pretty sure that both companies have valid patents and valid claims, but to my mind it is practically impossible to measure who has more of them or more important patents (there are simply too many of them). Definitely when taking into account that the old agreement obviously says that the "foundation" patents are paid up. Second post here me being not mad.