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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Lurgio who wrote (42545)9/26/1999 6:56:00 PM
From: Clarksterh  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Jim - You might be right but my question is then why have all the Japanese licensed with IDC for GSM ?

I don't know. How much are they paying? Darrell made a reference to the fact that there is another set of IDC patents for GSM. Those I haven't seen. Maybe those were the ones licensed? If they are of the same calliber(sp) as the 089 patent and I were the Japanese, I might pay just because it has some merit (unlike the GTE patent that is being used against the Q), and it would almost certainly be cheaper than fighting it (assuming, as appears to be the case based on the NOK settlement, the royalty amount is pretty low on a percentage basis?). ???

Clark



To: Jim Lurgio who wrote (42545)9/27/1999 12:19:00 AM
From: Bux  Respond to of 152472
 
Jim, Clark asks a good question. You claim "all the Japanese have licensed" with IDC. Just how much have these Japanese companies paid IDC so far? Is IDC just a gnat on their back? Was the licensing just a pay-off to get them off their back? How much per year do these licenses cost. If I don't see some concrete figures (above and beyond the legal fees that would be necessary to call IDC's bluff) I will assume these licenses are so much hot air.

Bux