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 (75716)	3/21/2008 2:09:00 PM
From: iggyl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197214

Possibly in the discovery process sharing of information between companies like Broadcom and Nokia provided confidentially by Qualcomm to only one of the parties will be uncovered.

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (75716)	3/21/2008 2:24:10 PM
From: Stan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197214

Art, as to your point, I recall that there is a famous Supreme Case (can't recall the caption at this point) that held that a Labor Union and an Employer can be engaged in an illegal conspiracy, in restraint of trade, if there is an understanding between the two that the Union will will not negotiate lower wages with any other company. (However, a "most favored nations" clause is legal, which says that if you DO give lower wages to another company my wage rate will be lowered to meet that number.) I suppose that the same theory could be applied to two companies: i.e., neither of us will agree to a royalty rate unless we're both satisfied with it. I would also think that an illegal act occurred if Nokia promised Broadcom some chip business in return for Broadcom's promise to hold the line in its negotiations with Qualcomm. That could help in establishing an illegal price fixing case but, short of an admission by one of the parties, it would be almost impossible to prove.