What IPR contracts are you talking about marginmike, my friend? The contracts that state that OEMs pay the same IPR to Q with WCDMA as with CDMA2000?
Lets have a critical look at that.
1) if you did not pay before, sign it and you commit to… nothing. N, S, A could have signed it losing nothing.
2) If they sign a licensing contract about the patent pool , and they end up not using it (not as hypothetical as you may think), do they have to pay? Depends on the contract, normally multiply with the sweet FA factor.
3) Why would such a contract be attractive for some OEMs if there is a possibility you might be able to do without the Q´s IPR anyway? I personally recommend everyone to sign it – if they have to use the patents, they have the right to do so, if not... (again, multiply with the sweet FA factor)
4) the original WCDMA designers have not signed the IPR deal apart from E, who got it with the infra purchase. Why not? This is what everyone should be discussing.
Well, I think its time someone showed the light. As usual, its going to be smartest one on the thread (myself): because they think they do not need them. How do they know? Well they wrote the standard for starters.
As for MITI certifying 1500 Q´s global IPRs to be payable, that´s like diamondhead certifying China deals. Even if they had such a mandate, which they don´t, how would they know what the other mfgs have in their labs? Its application vs. patent, case-by-case.
Q is not the only one with IPR claims to WCDMA. Others have many as well, some experts view E´s portfolio strongest. Stop shaving your legs and check out the P/E of E and compare that to Q´s. Otherwise you might end up changing your name to marginalmike.
- rajala |
