Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

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

QCOM 178.29

-1.6%

Dec 12 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: foundation who wrote (6140)	1/13/2001 6:09:33 PM
From: Theophile	Read Replies (1) of 196961

Examination of the ADVC thread on SI led me to asking DDInvestor.com a question, part of their reply: "Qualcomm There has been a lot of discussion about the SpectruCell implementation of CDMA without the need for Qualcomm chipsets. To clarify things a bit, Qualcomm does not own CDMA, it owns a specific hardware based implementation of CDMA. This is the IS-95 specification." and "What ACT has done is to develop an implementation of CDMA (IS-95) that does not use any Qualcomm chipsets. From legal advice and information received during discussions and meetings with Qualcomm, it would seem evident that we do not need any Qualcomm licensing to develop commercial SpectruCell systems. In the IS-95 specification there are some minor functions that Qualcomm have developed, such as pilot channel synchronisation with the handset, that may need minimal licensing. But this is by far the minimal portion and has no effect on the SpectruCell system." from: Message 15179 631 and the offer of a personal reply from Jason: "Once again I am more than happy to reply to technical issues related to SpectruCell, my email is jason@adcomtech.net and provided the questions do not rely on me disclosing commercially sensitive information I will post the answers on this board. " So, I am continuing to wonder why, for 59$, if they are important, why are they not yet gobbled up by LU or another? Martin Thomas PS: I did note they state "no licensing needed to develop...commercial systems"...is this another way of saying they don't need a license until they sell a system? Regards, MT

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next