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: lml who wrote (62881)	4/20/2007 5:58:20 AM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196952

>>NOK has chosen a 3rd scenario, one that may not have been specifically contemplated at the time of negotiation: non-renewal of the contract/cont'd use of Q's IP/ non-payment of royalties to Q. However, in contract law, in particular, the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) which deals with tangible goods, where the contract is silent, terms may be inferred based upon the parties "course of performance" following execution of the contract, as well as "course of dealing" prior to entering into the contract.<< Isn't there also an understanding of "good faith" in contracts, in that one party does not attempt to turn sleeze and use the terms of a contract to steal the property of the other. Wouldn't this also void the respective terms?

To: lml who wrote (62881)	4/20/2007 6:58:41 AM
From: jackmore	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196952

Let's not forget that Nokia will owe a royalty payment in June...the one that applies to the last set of handsets that were sold under the old contract. Q has rejected Nokia's $20 million "advance payment", and I imagine expects full payment by June. It will be interesting to see what Q does if Nokia fails to pay it by then. My guess is that Nokia will make the June payment in full.