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: BoonDoggler who wrote (76298)	4/15/2008 3:08:27 AM
From: pyslent	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196959

and Qualcomm then decides to split the company, and Nokia is obligated to license their IPR to chipmaker SPINCOII, and Qualcomm has now exhausted its obligations to offer any deal to Nokia for 3G IPR, then it's just "<yawn>, we'll just have to pay some more money", huh, Slacker? Even if any and all you say here comes to pass, I still don't see how it impacts anything other than Nokia's cash hoard. When all is said and done, the worst-cast scenario for Nokia is that they end up paying the same as everyone else instead of their current sweatheart deal. And that's if and only if Qualcomm splits the company.

To: BoonDoggler who wrote (76298)	4/15/2008 7:21:08 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196959

and Qualcomm then decides to split the company, and Nokia is obligated to license their IPR to chipmaker SPINCOII, and Qualcomm has now exhausted its obligations to offer any deal to Nokia for 3G IPR, then it's just "<yawn>, we'll just have to pay some more money", huh, Slacker? Two points. 1) Again, unless the termination of the SULA leaves Q with the rights to Nokia's IP, it will end up in a stand-off. Yes, Nokia would be obligated to offer a FRAND license for all "essential" patents. However, there are a whole host of non-essential patents that go into these handsets as well (as Broadcom has shown), and Nokia is under no obligation to license these. We will end up in court and Q will still be at risk of an injunction. 2) Let's stipulate that your scenario is true AND that Nokia has no non-essential IP (very unlikely). What do you think that the response of the European Commision will be to Q unilaterally refusing to license any patents to Nokia? I would wager a large sum of money that even if everything went Q's way that Nokia would still end up with a license....and I doubt it would be higher than a company with no IP currently pays (and more likely would just be a long-term renewal at the current rate with a huge upfront fee). Anything else would invite a pretty fast reaction from the EU. PJ may have made a few mistakes, but I doubt he is going to guarantee that Q gets enmeshed with a trial over monopoly charges. Slacker