[2 Samuel 22]

__________________________________
TECHNOLOGY ALERT
from The Wall Street Journal

June 7, 2007

In a ruling that will impact major wireless carriers, the U.S. International Trade Commission barred imports of new models of cellphones containing chips made by Qualcomm, after that company was found to have infringed on patents held by rival Broadcom. The move represents something of a compromise, as Broadcom had asked for a ban on imports of all devices containing the chips, not just future models.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, see:

WSJ.com - Login
(requires WSJ account)
__________________________________

So far no official word from VZW or Sprint.

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by 2 Samuel 22

__________________________________
TECHNOLOGY ALERT
from The Wall Street Journal

June 7, 2007

In a ruling that will impact major wireless carriers, the U.S. International Trade Commission barred imports of new models of cellphones containing chips made by Qualcomm, after that company was found to have infringed on patents held by rival Broadcom. The move represents something of a compromise, as Broadcom had asked for a ban on imports of all devices containing the chips, not just future models.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, see:

WSJ.com - Login
(requires WSJ account)
__________________________________

So far no official word from VZW or Sprint.

Verizon Wireless spokeswoman Nancy Stark blasted the ITC's decision. "It's a bad order for the industry and for the millions and millions of wireless consumers who depend on wireless communications," she said. "It's really going to freeze innovation, or it could."

Verizon's Stark said her company is also planning to file for an immediate stay of the ITC's decision with a federal appeals court and to lobby for a presidential veto of the order. She said she wasn't sure whether Verizon would be filing the documents solo or with other wireless carriers.

She added that the order is unfair because wireless companies and manufacturers weren't able to be a party to the liability portion of the proceedings, and they were never accused of patent infringement themselves or found to have infringed.

"It violates our principles of due process and fairness by punishing us when we haven't been accused of anything or found to infringe," she said.

She declined to discuss the ruling's potential impact on Verizon's future product roll-outs or sales, saying only, "this isn't final for 60 days...we're confident that we have a very strong case for appeal."