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: Rich Bloem who wrote (62992)	4/23/2007 12:35:38 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197001

Rich, I find "what if"s are good for my future. Waiting to see what happens is hazardous for my future. <there is no credible proof. > Not that I've seen. But now that QCOM has stated that they don't need NOK patents, it has put them in the position of continuing to use the patents, knowingly, so they had better be right. It looks questionable to me and I am betting that they are using Nokia patents, and know they are. I don't see how all those W-CDMA patents that Nokia has asserted for nearly a decade are just a load of dross and QCOM doesn't need any of them, even though they were deliberately installed in W-CDMA so that they would be essential. It just doesn't make sense. Which is unnerving. You can be sure that Nokia will be doing the necessary legal work to prove that QCOM is knowingly using Nokia patents. A court will decide the facts. Maybe a jury. So far, Mr Dull's jury didn't think QCOM was all that great and handed them a loss. At least there is the countervailing unpaid use by Nokia of QUALCOMM's intellectual property in GSM/GPRS/EDGE, which they acknowledged, but claimed they'd made a mistake, thinking they could use it as part of their overall deal in W-CDMA/CDMA2000. But I'd prefer to be lily-white than just as bad as Nokia. Given the length of time it takes for lawyerly and political processes, I'm not consoled by the time taken for EU investigations. It took NextWave Telecom a decade to get a decision, from C-block auction to Supreme Court ruling. It took the NZ IRD 3 years to investigate our trivial personal tax affairs. Which admittedly turned out to be much more complex than I had thought. That was without any court proceedings at all. WWII was started, run, and finished in less time than it takes these days to get a resource consent to build a house, let alone a significant EU decision on an international trade issue. Mqurice