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: manalagi who wrote (63040)	4/23/2007 10:54:47 PM
From: rkral	Respond to of 197739

That Broadcom vs Qualcomm patent infringement suit was filed 18 May 2005 in U.S. federal court of the Southern District of California (SDCA). The suit is likely stayed pending outcome of the ITC action. My understanding is that ultimately the SDCA decision takes precedence over any ITC decision. For example, the SDCA could find there is no infringement. carranza, JGoren or lml, is that understanding correct?

To: manalagi who wrote (63040)	4/24/2007 3:03:36 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 197739

Re: Treble damages--can be awarded only if BRCM can prove INTENTIONAL infringement. This is very difficult, especially if QCOM can show that it had a reasonable basis for its view that the patent was invalid. As an extreme example of intent, one might look at the Polaroid v. Kodak infringement suit, where Polaroid charged Kodak with something like a dozen infringements. Polaroid, chose not to share its patents, even though Kodak manufactured all of Polaroid's film material. Kodak wanted to get into instant photography, and after being denied a license from Polaroid, produced and sold its own instant camera and film. Polaroid sued, partly because Kodak's CEO told Polaroid that even if Polaroid refused to grant a license, Kodak would still make and sell its own instant cameras and film. I don't know a clearer example of intent, the basis for treble damages. Yet Kodak, which was found guilty of infringing something like 7 patents, got off with mere compensation for lost Polaroid sales. BRCM so far has succeeded in making a mountain out of a mole hill. But as Yogi said, it ain't over till it's over. Art