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 (76831)	5/3/2008 9:55:12 AM
From: whisperer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197208

What NOK claims is more subtle. Whether NOK’s interpretation is subtle or clever, is a matter of opinion. In the end, the fundamental dispute remains the same: NOK says it holds an ETSI license, so QCOM cannot sue for infringement even if NOK is in breach of the '01 SULA. QCOM says NOK has no such ETSI license, and even if it did the '01 SULA supersedes it. Obviously, you and I are not going to settle the issue here, so we'll have to wait for the trial. Why is a dragging dispute Nokia's fault? All Qualcomm needs to do to cut the debate short is offer terms to Nokia that Nokia finds acceptable. Without the possibility of infringement (automatic ETSI license to all essential patents) NOK does not have much incentive to come to the table. So you’re right, in such a scenario, the only way QCOM can get any royalty is to accept NOK’s terms. But it sure is frustrating. Yes it is. -W