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: Stock Farmer who wrote (75583)	3/19/2008 4:35:39 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197198

QUALCOMM could get injunctions for the patents which are not part of the ETSI agreement. I bet Nokia is using a lot more than just the essential patents under the bundled agreement which they previously enjoyed. That French law didn't preclude bundled patents. It referred to each patent, but didn't say those patents can't be handled in a single negotiation. QUALCOMM and Nokia can agree that the royalty for each patent can be undefined, but part of a 5%, 16%, or 42% bundle. Nokia did agree to that form in the previous agreement. The price of each patent wasn't defined in the agreement. QUALCOMM can reasonably sell them individually for more than the previous total. Prices don't stay the same forever, as we all know. Nokia thinks prices have gone down. QUALCOMM thinks prices have gone up. It looks to me as though QUALCOMM is in a vastly better negotiating position than previously and the market can certainly sustain a MUCH higher royalty, as proven by the $20bn in spectrum just sold by the USA and by the growth in 3G running on QUALCOMM technology. If Nokia ceases being a licensee, that won't slow things at all. Samsung, Sony-Ericsson and others would be delighted if Nokia announced they were going back to making gum boots. Mqurice

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (75583)	3/19/2008 8:30:14 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197198

It is at times like these that I wish I had taken the Civil Law curriculum at Tulane instead of the common law courses. Don't ask me how I passed the La. bar exam. vbg Anyway, the following precis [I did learn a little], suggests that injunctions are indeed available to IP owners under French law. However, things are undoubtedly more complex than this blurb sets them out to be as NOK claims it has, I guess, an implicit license. Incidentally, I wonder why they didn't make the same argument when Nokia got the 2001 license. All they had to do was not pay and wait for the 'negotiations' to drag out until eternity was over without infringing. The blurb: It is possible to obtain an interim injunction to stop infringing acts. An interim injunction is an order requiring the infringer not to engage in certain actions. For patents, designs and copyright, an interim injunction may be granted by the president of the court in all urgent cases if no serious objection is raised. Even where confronted with serious objections, the president may, at any time, order interim injuction measures. A specific interim injunction is available for trademark infringement. The trademark owner can ask the court to stop the infringing acts subject to the requirement that the action before the court be lodged soon after the claimant becomes aware of the infringement. Usually, the French courts consider that a maximum of six months’ delay is acceptable when requesting an injunction. A decision on the merits can be rendered quickly. Therefore, it is recommended that the claimant file an action within the six-month deadline. More at buildingipvalue.com