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 : Drexler Technology Corp. (DRXR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Leslie1y2o who wrote (19)	5/26/1998 2:48:00 AM
From: Earl Mincer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59

Well, actually I believe that they do have a valuable technology. But whether or not they will be able to capatilize on it in larger markets than their current ones, I can't say. And their choice to go after Microsoft instead of Ioptics is very unusual. There may be a legitimate reason, but I doubt it's something as simple as Microsoft having deeper pockets. If it were that simple, it wouldn't be a sound strategic decision because Microsoft is not directly infringing. They might be made party to a lawsuit, but I would think they'd have to go after the infringer as well, which they are not. One caveat: remember, I prosecute patent applications for new technology, not infringement cases. So there may be something here that I'm not seeing. And yet, being in the Intellectual Property field, I do see their choice to go after Microsofht and not Ioptics as odd. But who knows, perhaps they have some strategic reason behind it all. Good luck!