RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn 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.

Politics : RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: jimtracker1 who wrote (12983)	3/21/2007 4:55:15 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (1) of 14464

"You kinda have the facts a little messed up. TXN and QCOM cross licensed DSP for CDMA technology, on a royalty free basis. QCOM sued TXN even though they had a nondisclosure agreement, TXN made public the terms." JT are you saying that TXN currently pays Q a cash royalty on WCDMA? ...Or are you saying that TI is not producing WCDMA... and thus not using FRAM in a cell phone design and thus not paying a royalty to Q? ...And why did Q drop the suit? What I don't understand is why you think TI could or would produce an embedded FRAM for a cell phone design at 90nm or better for Nokia but wouldn't use the IP for any other product first. In my experience that kind of risk in this business is extremely rare these days. From what I've seen so far, IF the Fujitsu BFO hype can be converted to FRAM product at sub 0.65um by Fujitsu by 2009 you might see a FRAM chip in a some cell phone this decade. But that "if" is gargantuan... and that "might" is mighty shaky... No matter what Q & Nokia decide to do or not do. <vbg> 0\|0 P.S. Don't forget the corrupt market... of which we are currently participants... requires an equally corrupt judicial system in order to maintain its assorted scams. 0\|0

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next