Lakers,
<< Refusal of whose term? >>
QUALCOMM believes it has essential Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) for W-CDMA, and it intends to license these patents on reasonable terms and conditions free from unfair discrimination for a single converged IMT-2000 standard, or, if not achieved, only for cdma2000. ... QUALCOMM has no intention of generally licensing its essential patent portfolio for any IMT-2000 standard (such as W-CDMA) that is purposefully made incompatible with cdmaOne and ANSI-41 without providing a material benefit to the industry. - Qualcoom - "3G 5 Points" 10/98
The above published about 6 weeks before the ITU said in no uncerain terms, "look Mr. Qualcomm, and look Mr. Ericsson, you guys go off and settle this or there will be NO CDMA of any flavor approved for IMT-2000".
<< look straight into my eyes ... What's the focus of the several years of bitter battle between Q and the other nice guys, those who got the rude refusals, is it about 5 principles or the IPR? >>
Lets back track old buddy.
The conversation I related took place with senior engineers working for carriers, not with vendors reps whose management might be concerned with same.
These guys couldn't care diddly about who pays who for what.
They care about getting technology implemented.
If you would like to perpetuate the myth that so far as 3GPP is concerned there is no valid reason other than a Q IP workaround for utilizing 5 MHz carrier, asynchronous as well as synchronous mode of operation, AMR, authentication with SIM, etc, etc., feel free to do so.
The time frame I'm talking about was September 1999. when my friend Caxton was proclaiming almost daily to anyone that would listen that "GSM is toast" and Perry La Forge was stating we would steamroll Europe.
Compromised chip rate had been ratified several months earlier and we had already entered the age of 3G harmonization. The cross licensing arrangement with Ericsson had been entered into 6 months earlier making the issue of whether Qualcomm got paid for essential IP or not moot, or whether Qualcomm would license cdma for something other than a single converged cdma standard was also moot. cdma2000 phase 0 was in spec, and the final 'R99' draft about to be published.
There was a general feeling of euphoria on these threads (that some muight term irrational exuberance) and the stock action reflected it.
Getting back to the specifics of the question that was proposed to me ...
... the reality is that GPRS is the bearer service for both GSM phase 2 plus and for DS, TDD, and EDGE and so far as I know, nobody has yet started to commercialize IS-833, but perhaps there will be an attempt to for Unicom. Any thoughts that were ever given to incorporating a cdma air-interface in 2nd generation GSM back in 1997 and 1998 (and there was consideration given) are dead as a door nail now ... and they were dead as a door nail back in 1999, despite speculation here (on S&P 500) to the contrary.
In addition, any thoughts of standardizing IS-856 for GSM MAP have long since been tabled in 3GPP2. The top two priorities there are getting Revision A published, and completing the baseline for 1xEV-DV and Revision C.
Vodafone is moving full steam ahead with GPRS across all 28 or so of the networks they own 100%, or those they have controlling interest in, and will buildout with UMTS DS wherever they have licenses for 3G in IMT-2000 GHz spectrum, and eventually will upgrade the cores to all-IP and extend with HSDPA.
I personally think that there was little or no likelihood that they were considering any other course of action back in 1999, and I don't think that they have any intentions of deviating the plan they are embarked on now.
... and that is the question I responded to.
Best,
- Eric - |
