SI
SI
discoversearch

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 163.33-1.0%Nov 25 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dave who wrote (16678)10/16/1998 11:57:00 PM
From: Bux  Read Replies (1) of 152472
 
*OT* *OFF TOPIC* Dave, Just in case you are honestly having a hard time understanding these simple issues, I will explain this one more time (sheesh).

<To summarize everyone's arguments on the thread: It is ok for Qualcomm to receive broad coverage on their patents, however all other companies invention can only have narrow coverage.>

I never said Qualcomm should receive broad coverage. I was explaining that a narrow interpretation of Qualcomms patents would recognize that the Q's IPR applies to narrowband AND wideband CDMA. In other words I, and I think most participants of this forum, understand that patents are interpreted narrowly but that "narrow" in this context is entirely unrelated to the narrow in narrowband. You have a firm conviction that a narrow interpretation of the Q's IPR would exclude broadband but have given us no reason other than the MOTs vibrating pager patent does not apply to a cell phone. As I stated earlier, a vibrating pager alert is not a technological breakthrough, merely a new application of an existing invention. Vibrating alerts have been around alot longer than pagers. In any case, you should know that this type of patent is much more narrowly interpreted than inventions that are based upon genuine innovation. Since you will probably blather on about other irrelevancies anyway, why don't you explain why Mots vibrating pager IPR applies to all pager frequencies and all vibrating rates. Under a narrow interpretation, could I not market a vibrating pager that vibrated a little faster? A little longer? With a different air-interface? Give us a break!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News