Nokia (NOK) 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 : Nokia (NOK)

NOK 6.665

-1.0%

Nov 17 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (836)	8/6/1998 10:54:00 AM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (1) of 34857

Tero, Any IPR issue over W-CDMA could well be a long haul. If I may let me use Interdigitals 7 year IPR issue in the German courts. Under the protest of Siemens/Alcatel/Philips IDC requested and was granted a TDMA patent . The parties then took it to court to have the patent invalidated . Before the first decision of the court validating the patent Siemens withdrew from the case and became a consortium partner with IDC to develop B-CDMA. The case went on and this March Alcatel joined the consortium of IDC/Siemens/Samsung to develop B-CDMA. Eighteen days later Alcatel and Philips withdrew from the suit stating they no longer use the patent . To date IDC hasn't received a dime regarding that TDMA patent but now they have Alcatel for a partner. My point is what did the 7 year dispute produce now that the patent is valid ? If it's valid then all of the countries that belong to the EPO should have to pay IDC if they have used that patent in their products but there has been no revenues from Europe regarding that patent. ERICY too is testing that patent in the USA courts and that is going on for what seems like eons. The amazing thing is that since that German court decision Kyocera/Sharp and Toshiba have licensed with IDC and paid 48 million. You and Gregg both make strong points regarding the issue but most probably it will go to court. Samsung is building a trial B-CDMA system in Chonqging China and it was asked in the QCOM forum if IDC would have to use Qcom's IPR to build that system. Gregg responded and said Qcom's counsel believed that IDC and Samsung both may have to pay Qcom. In a sec filing by IDC in the results of the Qcom vs IDC patent issue over CDMA they stated that they believed Qcom's ipr would not have to be used to build a B-CDMA system. Well it looks like there may be another court case once the system in Chonqging is built but IDC has much stronger partners . From what I'm told W-CDMA and B-CDMA are very similar systems except currently B-CDMA is not mobile. Who knows that might even be another court case ? Have a nice day. Jim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next