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 : EDTA (was GIFT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Witt who wrote (1481)	11/4/1997 10:25:00 AM
From: Scott Ozer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2383

Everyone is worried about "Hype", Give me the facts and I can make my own decissions, Mgmt should get the facts out especially since they are new. The Truth is a defense principle still holds up, to my knowledge.

To: Bob Witt who wrote (1481)	11/4/1997 10:46:00 AM
From: Cleve Noyes	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2383

<<Common sense dictates that the patent has merit or it would have been thrown out long ago. Need I add that IBM has licensed to E-data? Why would IBM do that? Because IBM has stupid lawyers? I think not.>> Here's another way to look at the situation: Granted IBM most likely does not have stupid lawyers. Perhaps they have exceptionally intelligent lawyers who realize that it it is better to pay a small sum as a licensing fee rather than pay a large sum fighting a nuisance suit. Perhaps also, E-DATA would like to have IBM as a licesnee so they can tout their claims, drum up the stock, and get more companies to panic and license as well. Would not E-DATA in this scenario be willing to accept almost ANY amount (say $10) as a licensing fee? They get to claim that they "won" thereby encouraging others to follow suit, and IBM gets the benefit of not having to defend themselves against a nuisance suit. Win/win situation. Hey, it's just a theory, but one you may want to consider.....