back to article US watchdog legal fight against Qualcomm and pushy chip deals closes with argument over how awful lawyers are

It's been a couple of weeks of contradictory arguments in US trade watchdog the FTC's lawsuit against chip designer Qualcomm. So perhaps it was appropriate that the whole thing ended with a meta-contradiction concerning the nature of the legal system itself. In his closing arguments for Qualcomm – which has been accused of …

  1. Snake Silver badge

    3 guys walked into a bar...

    "But, Van Nest, argued that the judge should disregard those claims as "highly exaggerated," because those executives are attorneys. And you know you can't trust what attorneys say."

    Frank honest from a lawyer. Something's wrong there for sure.

    Bankers, lawyers and criminals. But I repeat myself.

    1. Anonymous Coward

      ...the 4th guy ducked.

      Jennifer Milici seemed pretty cool until I remembered she's a lawyer. So it must not be absurd at all, and this sort of thing happens on Sesame Street all the time, and they call it a bar exam...

  2. W.S.Gosset Silver badge

    Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

    Can anyone remind me what the (short) name is of the US law which provides for enforceable licensing of IP and at a fixed/standard rate ("formula" in lawyer-speak) ?

    I'm having a brain fade moment (it's 35C and soakingwet humid here).

    1. W.S.Gosset Silver badge

      Re: Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

      (interestingly, so was ElReg's maintenance coder last night. The EditPost time-window is currently set to 1,500mins: 25 hours precisely. Whoops?)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

      Are you referring to FRAND? I don't know the particular USC covering it, though.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

      There is no US law that provides for FRAND. FRAND is a contractual agreement entered into voluntarily by companies choosing to participate in a standards process that requires it (as the LTE and 5G standards processes did)

      It applies to all companies that agreed to participate all over the world, or at least in any country that enforces contract law. The question isn't over whether FRAND is enforceable, no one disagrees with that. The question is exactly what the terms mean, since there is some potential wiggle room which is where this dispute comes - i.e. whether you can license based on a percentage of the cost of the entire device or only on the cost of the device that implements your IP, and whether you can tie other IP your company owns to that license in an all or nothing fashion.

    4. ciaran

      Re: Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

      Reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) ?

    5. W.S.Gosset Silver badge

      Re: Q: Default mandatory Licensing in US?

      Ah ha!

      Thank you, all.

  3. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

    Jury Duty

    It's educational to be a juror once to realize that the legal system is an expensive and ruthless game of deception where nobody wins. A second time would be torture.

    1. Anonymous Coward

      Re: Jury Duty

      Count yourself lucky. In our district the pool of miscreants exceeds the pool of potential jurors to the extent that jury duty is almost annual event.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Jury Duty

        Wow, I think I'd move out of concern for my safety if nothing else if I lived in such a criminal hotbed!

        I've been called exactly once, many years ago, and when I called in to the number the night before as instructed and entered my ID number a recording said I wasn't needed and didn't have to show up the next morning.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like