Interdigital Communication(IDCC) 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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC)

IDCC 369.41

-3.0%

Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bux who wrote (4707)	7/7/2001 3:26:32 AM
From: postyle	Read Replies (1) of 5195

Bux, You are a riot for looking up all those old posts. I am not going to discuss anything more about Corp, as he does not need me to defend him. I'm surprised you say there is no evidence that the '94 Q/IDC agreement isn't limited to 2G technologies except for the 1X networks in Korea. I would add to that the 1X network in Japan and the 3 million 1X handsets that have already been sold, all with Qualcomm ASIC's inside. Do you think IDC would just sit there and play dumb if Qualcomm was openly violating the '94 agreement they signed with IDC? Do you think that agreement is not legally binding? I can't believe we are discussing this, most obvious, point yet again. Bux, many things in this industry aren't black and white. I haven't seen a copy of the licensing agreement between IDCC and QCOM. I do not know what has been said (if anything) between the companies since that agreement. I can assume that 1X technologies are covered by the existing contract. But what I do realize, is that the definition of "2G" and "3G" today is not the same as it was when the licensing took place, when past comments were made, etc. Perhaps the semantics game is clouding the issue. The point is that there is still a possibility that IDCC will expect to be paid on full-blown CDMA2000 technologies when they become available. IDCC claims they have essential IPR that intersects CDMA2000, and I believe it was said that those patents were not covered by the pact. It is the same situation with IDCC having less IPR in the ARIB version of W-CDMA than the UTRA/UMTS versions.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next