Do I have it right, that you believe a purchased patent (extraneous/ obscure/ questionable) deemed viable by the opinion of a jury w/o any technical / legal knowledge **is equivalent / can outweigh** an internally developed patent portfolio in the 1,000 developed over 20 some years, and as such destroy a companies / the world’s incentive to innovate???
I have clearly never said that. I see this as a very narrow issue. All of the extraneous motivations or WCDMA license negotiations have zero impact on how I see this ruling.
Qualcomm is infringing on a Broadcom patent. That is what the ITC has ruled and the fact that this is a patent over a small non-essential function makes no difference. It also makes no difference that I think this patent seems obvious (though I'm not an expert).
As the owner of the patent, Broadcom has the right to exclude all products that are practicing that function. If this patent is so unworthy, shut off the function or make a work around. Qualcomm has zero right to continue to practice this patent which they dont own. The only reason they get any leniency at all is that ITC also incorporates the public interest into their decision. Thus, we get this compromise....which is actually a lot better than I could have imagined coming out a six political appointees. They actually managed to craft a decision that minimized the impact while simultaneously giving Broadcom some form of remedy.
Sorry Jim, but I cant imagine you making this same argument if Qualcomm was suing Broadcom using one of the MIMO patents that they picked up from Airgo. I think you would be singing a different tune then....
Slacker
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
