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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave who wrote (16334)	10/12/1998 9:48:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

It's not Ira. Jon.

To: Dave who wrote (16334)	10/13/1998 9:46:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Another thought relating to an old post : Rajala: <<How come every time Dr. J talks in some vague and round way about the W-CDMA IPR, everyone on this thread gets ecstatic?>> The reason why Dr. Jacobs talks pretty vague about the Q's IPR is because he doesn't want to hurt his position if the Q has to go to court and enforce its patents. All statements made by Dr. Jacobs are admissable in court, therefore he is extremely careful about what he says. dave Also, I believe that when one has an overwhelmingly HUGE advantage in an upcoming legal battle, there is no need to "spout off." It is only when one has nothing at all (Ericsson comes to mind (?)) that the words come "fast and furious." Jon.