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: DaveMG who wrote (20344)	12/23/1998 10:27:00 AM
From: Dave	Respond to of 152472

DaveMG: The question is was what are the implications for Qualcomm if they don't hold blocking patents? Didn't I answer that one? dave

To: DaveMG who wrote (20344)	12/23/1998 10:36:00 AM
From: Gregg Powers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

DaveMG: By the way, were it not for "blocking IPR", no invention would be secure from duplication. Technological innovation as we know it would cease because no one would be willing to fund it. Think about it. Many biologicals, i.e. proprietary drugs, are not particularly difficult to manufacture...but their owners have spent upteen millions creating them and proving their efficacy. Should a foreign company simply be able to "copy" the drug? How about software? Should I be able to "copy" the internal elements of Microsoft Windows, rewrite the GUI, and claim the technology as my own? How many software algorithms are inherent in QC's implementation of CDMA? Should none of these inventions be protected? Why doesn't 3COM simply disassemble a Cisco router or hub and copy the components? Why is Cadence Design suing Avant! for theft of trade secrets? I could go on and on, but you should get my point. Companies spend millions to create proprietary technology positions. If competitors could simply choose to ignore a patent position and copy such inventions, then the technological world that we enjoy would rapidly descend into chaos. Nobody would spend the money to develop a proprietary drug or medical device. Cisco, Lucent, Microsoft and Intel would rapidly become worthless...because competitors would simply copy their products. It really IS obvious. It just does not SEEM obvious. Best regards, Gregg

To: DaveMG who wrote (20344)	12/24/1998 3:58:00 PM
From: Dave	Respond to of 152472

DaveMG: Patent Law, like 9/10ths of the Law, is pretty easy to understand. Most of the time it is just plain common sense. Maurice just suggested that the US Government would be unlikely to back QCOM and the CDG if the IPR was shaky Maybe Qualcomm is paying lobbyists. I doubt the US Government has really looked into the situation substantially. I believe the US Government is just making a "formal" protest on behalf of one of their companies. No more, no less. The question is was what are the implications for Qualcomm if they don't hold blocking patents? If Qualcomm doesn't hold "blocking" patents, there are several scenarios that could happen. I explained some in this post.... Message 6939359 dave