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: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (69001)	9/18/2007 5:02:03 PM
From: engineer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 197676

Art, I humbly disagree with you. As I pointed out this morning, the Eu is in antitrust area by themselves, wihtout anyone else getting into the fray. How does a good lawyer beat a stacked deck? If they are going to sponsor their own google competitor and then restrict Google, it is a violation of the WTO. If they mandate that WCDMA has to be open and then mandate that DVB-H is closed, they are conflicting their own ruling. Did you think they did the DVB-H because it is a compelling technology? It is 2.5x WORSE in coverage than WCDMA and 4-5x worse than Media flow. both are worse than MBMS. So what is the EU actually doing here? Another loser mandate like the WCDMA one? where the carriers buy spectrum and then have to wait for a US company to fix it so they can use it? I think in all these there has to be alot of srutiny on the motives behind the action. the other problem is that the Eu commision has no counterbalance. Nobody is watching them and their operating rules. this leads to abuse, which is how I view the statment about Google. Also, if we had good lawyers and the EU just rules without merit, just who do they appeal to? how would a change come about? Take care.