Everybody...
Please read the QC ETSI-related press release very carefully. After all the questions, over-and-over, about IPR, it should be abundantly clear that Qualcomm views its position as unassailable. It would make no sense..nada...zero...none...to take such a hard line position with ETSI if ERICY could readily circumvent the company's patent position. Quite to the contrary, Qualcomm has instead called Ericsson's bluff. The latter must either now explain how it can go forward with W-CDMA without QC's IPR, or it must come to the bargaining table and get serious about negotiation.
To again state the obvious, Qualcomm would not have called Ericsson's bluff if it didn't feel it had four aces in its hand. If QC's IPR position was vulnerable, it would have made vastly more sense to license W-CDMA--even if it mean a bifurcation of CDMA standards--because QC would have collected royalties from markets in which its participation is currently foreclosed. By not licensing the technology, QC has stalled W-CDMA.
Tero...I have one simple question for you, and please don't give me a glib, non-specific, Ericsson is all-powerful, answer. Why does ETSI need Qualcomm to clarify its position with regard to licensing its IPR for W-CDMA if said IPR is not required for W-CDMA? Please...no emotional, off-the-top-of-your-head, glib responses. Please think about this very carefully. Understand that ETSI obviously understands the standard and the intellectual properties contained within it. If QC's IPR was not essential, why would QC even be involved in the debate?
Best regards to all,
Gregg |
