If I may be so bold as to clarify something I think Gregg is saying, in simple terms:
Imagine you and I are neighbors. We each want to make some improvements to our property. I want to build a little shed to store a few things, you want to build a fence to get a little privacy and hem in your randy dog. One problem, the area you want to build your fence on is on my property. We really only dispute to what extent you are infringing -- you are agree there is some level of infringement. I'm willing to let you build it, but I want a reasonable return for letting you use my property. You don't want to pay me and disagree on the extent of the infringement.
While we hash this out, talking about each other to the other neighbors, you drawing up plans for your fence, I can go ahead and build my shed, knowing good and well it is on my property and I've got every right to build it.
Our fence dispute could take years. Surveyors, attorneys, bureaucrats, etc. all stick their noses in our business, and there you sit, no fence, and your dumb dog running all over the neighborhood, knocking up all the other dogs and messing in people's yards, your kids stumbling into the street to play, your wife sunbathing nude in plain view of everyone. All because you couldn't cough up a little cash for the use of my property.
My shed keeps my things nice and safe and dry for years.
There will clearly be a court battle, and all of the necessary injunctions against building W-CDMA systems, if this goes to court. Meantime, Q rolls merrily along building IS-95 all over the globe and eventually giving cheap upgrades to cdma2000.
ERICY rots, stagnant and impotent.
IMHO, with all due repsect to everyone on the thread.
mmeggs |
