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 : The New QUALCOMM - Coming Into Buy Range -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (1110)	8/24/2007 8:51:52 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 9132

"Have a great weekend." You too. But regarding the EC and the QCOM=NOK dispute, I retain my view expressed on the Moderated thread last March. Based on an analysis by one of the top experts in the U.S. on international organizations, especially the EC, it is unlikely Nokia will prevail for the reasons stated previously. My source took into account the business practices in question and weighed the complaint against related EC actions in other cases. He believed Nokia had a weak case because (1) QCOM rates were not excessive, were available to all firms, and were consistent with practices condoned by the EC; and (2) the business practices were being contested by only a small fraction of licensees, all of whom were receiving treatment substantially the same as the 140 or so not complaining. I believe, furthermore, that Brewster's views on QCOM, while they may be known to the EC officials, are not material because they do not deal with the same patents or licensing agreements. BRCM, you may recall, doesn't even have a license, but was offered one on the same terms as others. If I were an EC official, I would wonder why BRCM even joined the others, who at least were licensees. Art