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 161.20

+1.0%

10:10 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Asterisk who wrote (16509)	10/15/1998 5:54:00 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (2) of 152472

Michael: Look the reality so far is that QCOM seems to have blocking IPR, and until that issue is resolved everything else matters not. Your source is the Q. I would recall that as a biased source. The only reason why I posted the number of "rake receiver" patents was to show that the Q isn't the only one inventing. It is easy to say that the Q has the fundamentals, however, when someone else finds out that other entities have similiar patents, you change the arguement. If the 15 patents from QCOM cover all of the relevant functionality of rake recievers and Ericcsson patented the name then E is sunk. No b/c Ericy could have a different implementation. Remember Intel has patents on their uP, AMD has patents on their uP. Sun Microsystems and Intel have different platforms. There can be different "rake receivers" If all of Ericcssons patents are on uses in TDMA or GSM then it is screwed They aren't. I have posted the number of patents Ericy has on CDMA implementations. It is a great idea for pagers but I believe that some court found that they had no right to expand their scope of their patents to include the Q phone. LIke the Q and W-CDMA, right? ARe you going to now admit that the Q's earlier patents on CDMA may not cover wideband applications? Sounds like you are about to. dave

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next