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 174.54

-1.2%

Nov 13 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (20498)	12/29/1998 12:36:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) of 152472

Tero - You can be sure that if Qualcomm ever starts making W-CDMA equipment they have to pay licensing fees to Nokia. W-CDMA networks are being built right now in Italy, China, England, Germany, etc. Show me where in the Qualcomm patents it says 'good for narrowband only' or 'good for IS-95 only'? It doesn't. While I have not checked Nokia's patent position in regards to key CDMA patents, I have checked Ericsson's, and for the areas I've checked (soft handoff and power control both of which are essential to CDMA mobile cell systems) its pretty clear that Ericsson is in deep doo-doo. It may be true that Nokia, or even the hated Ericsson<g>, has some patents for W-CDMA, but I imagine that they are for much less essential pieces. Thus Ericsson's claim that Qualcomm is trying to get more patent royalties is actually a fair statement of their own position. This is a good business tactic if you can get away with it by forcing the adoption of your standard. The problem is that Qualcomm can bypass W-CDMA patents (should any exist), but the inverse is not true. It's the difference between key and trivial. But the current GSM operators are all preparing to upgrade to W-CDMA. They show no interest in cdma2000. What was the noise all of the service providers were making recently about convergence? Certainly it doesn't qualify as "no interest". Clark PS FWIW - I recently went back through the Frezza forum, and I'll admit that I don't remember you claiming that CDMA was junk (unlike Frezza and some others). You just claimed that it would be steam-rollered by GSM and its momentum. That hasn't exactly happened, but neither has CDMA yet conquered GSM (although that looks like it will happen soon enough - 3 years to faster adds for CDMA than GSM?).

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next