Mr Fun, did you see that BAM is going to introduce calling party pays in the USA? ATT did a little test run and decided it was uneconomic [another bad decision by ATT]. It is simply amazing to me that USA telecoms people struggle so with the concept - I suppose they can't get around the idea that Paradigm Shift Happens and the old 'don't give out your cellphone number' mentality in the USA has not served anyone well.
There have been several huffing and puffing articles in the past week about CPP. The USA is so enamoured of the vast successes they have had that they are peculiarly blind to their failures. Places like India since independence don't need to be blind to their failures because they don't have any successes [okay, they have created nearly 1bn people from a very spartan economy and I subscribe to the idea that it's good to have people, not to mention a low murder rate].
On Q! IPR, <You still haven't convinced me that Q's IPR rights are knowable. I actually talked to several senior people from Eric in Geneva and discussed this specific topic. ERIC actually feels that there are ways around the Q patents, but that it will take a couple years that they didn't want to give up to develop the alternatives and fight it out in court. Since Eric feels its patents are as valuable as Q's vis a vis W-CDMA, better to settle up lest the battle slow down adoption. Nonetheless, they CLAIMED that they wouldn't have to pay royalties for more than a couple years. Now this certainly could be wishful thinking, but it is also not the proof you were looking for. As I said before, NOK, MOT, TI, DSP, LSI have all stated with complete conviction that they felt that Q would not be able to make them pay royalties on W-CDMA>
You choose to believe Ericy and not Q! for some reason. Perhaps you are new to the holy wars. The goosestepping world of GSM has conducted a very long [half a decade] campaign of lies and disinformation, FUD and deceit, from claims that CDMA in mobile breaches the laws of physics, to calling Irwin Jacobs a fraud [we need to drag that poor dead horse Bill Frezza out for another flogging at this point]. Q! has made very few comments which have not turned out to be true.
The capacity claims way back in 1989 have been touted around as evidence of Q! BS. Keep in mind that at that time, CDMA by Q! was very much in the theoretical period. Theory and reality always clash to some extent, but even so, those capacity claims have come to pass with more to come. They have never had a problem with actual capacity claims promised to service providers and THAT is where the rubber meets the road.
Ericy is like Pinnochio. You really do believe them at your peril. To entrust your funds to their comments is naive. Given their history, I'm bemused as to why you insist that Q! ownership of their technology is 'unknowable' other than the philosophical idea that NOTHING can be knowable. You still have to try to get from dawn to dusk, even if you believe everything is unknowable, so we must try with what little knowledge and understanding we have. SI helps us clear our heads, but we all have 99.9% fog in our brains. If we can reduce that to 99.8% we improve our chances dramatically. We DOUBLE our probability of being right and getting rich!
So, have you bought some Qualcomm stock now that you are convinced that the IPR position is more likely to match the huge acceptance by hundreds of companies or hold out for the remote possibility that Ericy has discovered a truth tonic?
Nokia is desperate to succeed in the CDMA world and has made a real hash of it so far. If they buy the Q! handset division, do you think that would lend credence to the idea that Q! really has got the technology wrapped up? It's surprising that Nokia has had so little success, since unlike Ericy, they signed up with Q! in 1990 [maybe 1991].
Now we have those losers at Sun, who helped initiate the attack on Microsoft, drawing a bead on Qualcomm, hoping to get the IPR wrested from Q! and made a nice, socialistic, fair, universal, open standard, so all can enjoy the fruits of Q! genius without paying [though they do suggest Q! might get say $30 an hour for their labours].
Message 11991916
Now THAT is seriously something you might ponder. Judge Jackson, Janet Reno and Joel Klein don't want to have to work for a living. Much better to suck on the government tit and go round attacking companies which produce the things which make our lives good. Whining SUN is likely to get support. Maybe SUN should give their stuff out for a derisory 'compensation' for going to the trouble of inventing Sun software and stuff. Fat chance.
I would much rather have some dumb judge or jury give an OJ decision on a particular patent than have the whole patent business turned topsy turvy. Inventors who fail get nothing. Inventors who succeed will NOT be allowed to get rich, they will be paid some derisory sum as condescending compensation from the cargo-cult mentality of the hunter gatherer Neanderthals who are still in our midst.
That's something to seriously worry about.<John Gage, chief researcher at Sun, told about 350 participants at the two-day Asia-Pacific Information Technology Summit here that wireless information appliances will eventually be the driving force in the growth of e-commerce.
Bill Joy, Sun's co-founder and chief scientist, said that the growth of communications bandwidth, or capacity, will eventually make the cost of communicating "close to free." Wireless networks are also extending their reach so that they soon will be "pervasive," he said.
But, Joy said, U.S. companies are likely to be at a disadvantage in that market because of the country's failure to develop common standards for the most widespread of such appliances, the cellular phone. "The U.S. has done a particularly bad job at this by creating too much competition," he said. There are too many different standards and carriers don't carry each other's signals, he said.
That diffusion will give Japanese and European appliance makers an advantage because common standards in their home markets will result in larger markets, he said.
Gage and Joy also predicted that the U.S. standard for high-definition television may have to be junked because, they said, it can't receive signals inside of buildings. The process by which that standard was adopted was tainted by politics, and should have been opened for public participation and criticism, Gage said.
Companies that supported the current U.S. standard wanted the opportunity to earn royalties from proprietary technology, and so opposed adoption of a pre-existing European standard, Joy said.
Looking to the future, Joy said that intellectual property rules need to be developed that offer "a sensible blend between sharing and (ownership that provides incentives) to people who are creating the value" in new technologies.
Other key public policy issues that
> This is one of the companies which initiated the government attack on Microsoft in a fit of greed and envy.
Thomas Sowell on the case. You need to scroll right to the bottom, go to his archives and it's in November:
jewishworldreview.com
I've read a lot of his stuff and I can't recall anything I've disagreed with yet. Therefore he is an excellent writer with excellent ideas. Unqualified recommendation to read screeds of his writing. Double your money back guarantee that you like those archives!
Maurice |
