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: John Dough who wrote (23030)	2/18/1999 3:43:00 PM
From: GO*QCOM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Dose Ericy have any employment base in Texas especially around Marshall?This could bias a jury if they did.On the other hand QUALCOMM is an American company with alot of phones being carried around while Ericy is a not.I would tend to think that QUALCOMM would have an edge.QUALCOMM's patent portfolio is large and extensive as is the list of firms that licensed the technology.Ericy has little in the way of patents and not one license.QUALCOMM's lawyers are no doubt the best but no company likes to hand their fate to 12 people they don't know has appropriate knowledge of the industry.Expert witness testimony is what could be used to make it more plain to average people.Hopefully Ericy folds in the talks and buys a license that also harmonizes 3G.

To: John Dough who wrote (23030)	2/18/1999 6:22:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Mark, most people can't even read a map! They let OJ off murdering a couple of people when stacks of evidence was there. In the absence of any understanding of the IPR and legal domains, the jury will tend to act like a random number generator but with a slight bias in one direction based on whether a lawyer is good looking or they think it isn't fair for Microsoft to make a lot of money and it would be lovely if everyone could just share all these great inventions for the good of mankind in God's name. If the judge doesn't boot it out [which seems unlikely unless it is totally egregious because it is so important] and it's true that some jury of Texans is going to decide who invented concatenated Reed-Solomon convoluted turbo coding with power control in reverse link Fourier wave functions excluding OMC-CDMA rake receivers we are likely to get anything by way of a decision. Ericy is on a can't lose case here. They start with nothing, so depending on how ignorant the jury is [which is bound to be almost totally], they might win anything up to the whole case. It seems very strange to let a jury decide such matters. This is not good. I suppose a bunch of Texans will think of Qualcomm as being AMERICAN and Ericy as one of those commie pinko job stealers from somewhere else in the world, so there is hope. I'd feel sorry for Ericy if the jury is a bunch of rabid flag waving patriots. Even if there are some Ericy production places in Texas. JGoren, what's your view of it all? Is it REALLY a jury? Do they decide anything of substance or just basic facts which anyone could see. It's pretty scary when you think that without the IPR, Q! is just one of the bunch with a head start, limited profit, small revenue and a tiny market share, in the total wireless world. Mqurice

To: John Dough who wrote (23030)	2/18/1999 11:59:00 PM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

You said a mouthful when you said : Just a thought. I don't see how a jury of ordinary people is going to have the technical expertise to understand the very complex digital wireless IPR's in question. In the case of IDC Vs Motorola also over digital patents , when the jury went out one juror called for the judge for an explanation on something she didn't understand. She needed to know the difference between a land line and a cellular line ? As you said this is a very complex issue and anyone who judges something like this should have expertise. IDC fought the same issue in the German courts which affords the expertise you suggest and Siemens/Alcatel/Philips all withdrew from the case but it took seven years. What effect if any did the lawyers have on this juror ? What ever company chose jury over a judge is either idiot or genuis. With jurors deciding this case don't count on what is right.