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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnG who wrote (67543)8/13/2007 1:33:52 PM
From: limtex  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 197225
 
JG- I thought that too till I read the judgement. I have since last week been trying to understand how what Rudi reports as evidence given could have been given.

I just simply do not understand.

Have you read the judgment? If you have and you still say what you say then there is hope I guess.

Best,

L



To: JohnG who wrote (67543)8/13/2007 2:33:24 PM
From: seti  Respond to of 197225
 

I don't see why Judge Rudy should penalize QCOM excessively. They have identified a trimary culprit and he has resigned. They have replaced him with an upstanding former US attorney.


QCOM has to be responsible.
Otherwise you can have this game where the company sets up a fall guy with a golden parachute.


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