Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) 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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 174.58

+0.2%

3:44 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: gdichaz who wrote (11593)	6/17/1998 9:11:00 PM
From: JMD	Read Replies (4) of 152472

chaz, me way confused! Where in the world did you get the notion that I was giving Bernard Levy a hard time? Bernard is one of the most polite, intelligent posters on SI and he has gone out of his way to help me understand a bunch of stuff. For all of which I have thanked him profusely. What post are you referencing? Further confusion: what post was directed at me or you or whatever? Finally, re: VLSI. The purpose of my question was to figure out why the [dearly beloved SF Chronicle] had screwed up, which is SOP for them. I assumed VLSI's CDMA chip had to pay royalties to the Q, but didn't know. By the way, I learned today from a reliable source that VLSI's ASIC is called CDMA-A, is NOT subject to the Q's IPR and is a run at Ericy's WCDMA sans Q. All in all, I thought it was a rather legitimate inquiry. No? Mike Doyle

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next