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 163.32+2.3%Nov 21 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ingenious who wrote (23326)2/24/1999 10:16:00 AM
From: Clarksterh  Read Replies (1) of 152472
 
Leland - Just to play the devil's advocate - this sounds like soft handoff. two base stations transmitting the same signal to a single handset as the handset travels closer to one base to a further away from the other.

I certainly hope not from Ericsson's point of view. The reason is multifold (in order of Qualcomm strength):

1) Qualcomm has a prior patent (5101501) for soft handoff with both basestations 'concurrently' transmitting the same information. (Note that Ericsson uses the word 'simultaneously' meaning, as defined in another section of the patent, received by the mobile bit-for-bit at the same time. Their definition of simultaneous is a restricted version of Qualcomm's 'concurrent'. See item #2.)

2) Ericsson must be consistent with any terms that they use which do not mean what they ordinarily mean. They have restricted the meaning of 'simultaneous' and with this restricted definition it can be said that Qualcomm does not 'simultaneously' transmit two identical signals from different basestations. This is not word play or legalese - Ericsson means a particular thing when they say simultaneous, and CDMAOne does not fall into that.

3)Lets assume that, in direct contradiction to the patents, it is decided that Ericsson really means concurrent when it says simultaneous (and Qualcomm's patent wasn't first). The overlap between the two patents is only that - that the two basestations be transmitting the same information concurrently. It should be easy to show that this is hardly a novel concept (i.e. it's too broad and is almost certainly in the literature in many places.).

4) Much more subjectively, I think it extremely unlikely that anyone familiar with the art would say that Qualcomm's softhandoff 'read's on' Ericsson's patent. Some of the reasons for this are given above, but they are not the only ones.

Clark
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