Competition, cdma2000 argument irrelevancy and "blackmail"
The term was "blackmailing the industry" and not specifically Ericsson. Also radio spectrum has to be available for WCDMA, see below:
If, as Qcom have done, a company says they have essential IPR and will withhold from granting licenses, then the standardization process is stalled. The "fairness principles" are actually demands that need to be satisfied. It can be then said that they are holding the industry to ransom.
The fact a court case is looming that might empower Ericsson to employ the same tactic over Qualcomm, not just for cdma2000, but also IS-95 seems to be overlooked. No matter ho informed an opinion may be, we wil all know more once the court case is finalized. If it is proved that Qcom have IPR related to UMTS/WCDMA and Ericy also win in court, then the likely scenario is cross-licensing. If that happens expect to see Ericsson enter the cdma handset business (and almost certainly not the IS-95 infrastructure business).
Another note, IMT-2000 services were meant to be in a newly gained radio spectrum of 2GHz. No country, to my knowledge, has issued licenses in that band for 3G yet. During the summer of 1999 Britain is likely to be the first country to auction licenses for UMTS, closely followed by Finland. Only then can something like WCDMA be deployed, and it will.
Manufacturers of WCDMA are currently marketing to current 2G operators (Lucent, Motorola, Ericsson and Nokia are doing so for sure). It is likely that Britain and other countries, in the interests of competition, will be looking for new entrants in to the market (which also makes the cdma2000 arguments irrelevant).
Of course all above is IMHO.
Regards,
Mika |
