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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
QCOM 179.02+3.7%3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: carranza2 who wrote (57601)12/11/2006 11:38:39 PM
From: Clarksterh  Read Replies (1) of 196491
 
I should think that determining whether a patent is "essential" to the standard is a fairly easy thing to do since the term is defined as IPR without which the standard could not be implemented.

??????????????????????????????????????

The whole point of the paper is that not all patents are created equal. I.e. Essential/Not-Essential is a bogus, overly simple partition.

I am sure that many of Nokia's patents are 'essential' in that the standard, as it is written, does not work without the patents. The point is that an equally good standard could have been written without them. But note that the only way to prove this at the level you are suggesting would be patent by patent - which would be awesomely tedious. Hence the more general point that not all patents are equal.

Clark
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News