SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC)
IDCC 369.41-3.0%Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mightylakers who wrote (4690)7/5/2001 2:20:59 PM
From: postyle  Read Replies (2) of 5195
 
mightylakers,

Thanks for your comments.

Yes, there was once was a time when I believed the rest of the world was aiming to circumvent QCOM IPR. I thought IDCC might have some of the core patents to aid NOK and the others around paying QCOM full price for their CDMA intellectual property.

I came to realize over time that the notion was indeed silly. As I became more versed in the technology, and started to seriously comprehend what was going on in the industry, it became quite clear to me:

QCOM has foundational CDMA property rights which can not be circumvented.

When QCOM posted on their website a few presentations that claimed their patents were A) not bandwidth specific and B) licensed for 3G use by over 50 manufacturers, I knew my capitulation was the right choice from an investment point of view.

I could go through the numerous posts of mine (mainly on Raging Bull) where I asserted this, but it's really just a waste of time.

But thanks, Bux, for bringing up that previous message of mine. {ggg}

postyle

p.s. You may have noticed how many others have changed their tune (re: QCOM's IPR position) as the information has been easier to access over the last year or two.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext