Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting


 Public Reply | Prvt Reply | Mark as Last Read | FilePrevious 10 | Next 10 | Previous | Next  
To: Ramsey Su who started this subject7/28/2003 3:46:11 PM
From: carranza2Read Replies (2) of 117494
 
Shutting down the STM/NOK/TXN alliance seems to be the motive for the suit. Though Q makes a decent amount from chip royalties, if it can shut down TI and therefore the Nokia/STM/TI alliance, it can essentially keep the much more profitable 1x market to itself. And no antitrust problems because of the patent exemption.

Samsung and Nokia would be relegated to making their own chips. Samsung appears to be able to do so, but only for its own consumption, as is the case with Nokia. Neither can sell to third parties.

The multimode stuff is unaffected since Q got enough GSM IPR from Nokia to put Spinco on ice; if TI loses the suit, it appears that Q may still have access to its DSP IPR.

The claim for damages is BS. This seems to about shutting down the NOK/STM/TI alliance, IMO, in order for Q to keep the 1x market mostly to itself.

Since the alliance was announced after the cross-license was signed, it would seem that TXN would have minded its legal obligations quite diligently in order to keep from Q making a claim for cancellation. Apparently, TXN failed to do so. It therefore may lose whatever advantages the license gave it.

The legal issue is whether the breach, which seems clear, is sufficient for Q to prevail. It seems that the royalty-free nature of the license may have already achieved some sort of widespread acknowledgment within the industry. If so, a Judge is going to feel very uncomfortable about cancelling the contract on the basis alleged by Q. I know I would.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public Reply | Prvt Reply | Mark as Last Read | FilePrevious 10 | Next 10 | Previous | Next  

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.