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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (5812)	5/26/1999 5:33:00 PM
From: NHP	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

Art I'd be the last person to predict the outcome of litigation, but it seems to me that based on the information in the article you just posted, Lexar is whistling dixie. We have known for quite some time that Lexar had a speed advantage over SNDK, but that is not really the issue. SNDK holds basic patents on the controller and "on the fly" locking out of bad memory cells. If Lexar is using either of these techniques, it seems to me that they are obliged to pay royalties to SNDK. Suppose, for example, Kodak had come out with an instant camera that used faster film than Polaroid. Would that have gotten around the Polaroid patents? But on the other hand, David Sarnoff and RCA got around Major Armstrong's Frequency Modulation patents (temporarily) simply by convincing the FCC that using a different frequency than what Armstrong was using, was not an infringement of Armstrong's patent. c'est la vie NHP

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (5812)	5/26/1999 6:01:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Art, re: the Lexar press release. Seems like Lexar is gasping for air here. Could this be a death knell? I think it is ludicrous to say that there has been false advertising. What the hell. There hasn't been any advertising at all. We have pointed out the fact that there has been a notable absence of advertising many times on this thread. Also, where do they come up with "anti-competitive"? CompactFlash is an open standard, as is the MultiMedia Card. That is the whole point of the CFA and the MMCA. If anything SanDisk has made the technology available to others rather than trying to dominate the market. Finally, Lexar has already proven that they can be a good competitor with their write speed innovations and USB firmware. It adds to the lunacy of their argument to say that SanDisk has attempted to drive them out of the market. In fact, in some ways the press release seems more like an advertisement with most of the text devoted to their technology and little in the way of substantive information regarding the suit. Is it libelous to say that someone else has been libelous without grounds or is this just legal posturing? Ausdauer