Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Wi-LAN Inc. (T.WIN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wonk who wrote (1316)	12/1/1999 2:06:00 AM
From: axial	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 16863

wonk - or, if I'm not being too familiar, wireless - Hell, we don't even know what we're dealing with here. I haven't found one person, not one, who claims the ability to differentiate successfully between WOFDM and VOFDM - in terms of which is likely to offer the best commercial alternative. Your point on the IPR issue is well taken - but again, there is no clear indication that a win by either side would be critical to ultimate commercial success. Here, I refer you to Philips' and Telia's de facto recognition of Wi-LAN's IPRs. What if a consortium opposed to Cisco agrees to license the WOFDM technology? Of what value then is ruinous litigation? The Qualcomm/Cisco model seems to be the new standard - lock up the patents, and let the royalties flow. The following is a cut from one of the many messages I've received on the subject - some censoring to hide identity. ___________________________________________________________ Cisco by the way >tries to patent EVERYTHING. I worked along with x >is(sic) challenging and defeating a CISCO patent after an >Engineer of mine found basically the same circuitry in >a IEEE text book that was issued 3 years before the >patent application. As for W-OFDM my only concern is that CISCO WILL find a way around it rather than buy out Wi-LAN. They can be bxxxxxxx, (believe me I go up against them often)at IEEE, TIA/EIA standards committees etc. __________________________________________________________ Litigation is a dangerous game; a skillfully presented case will have Cisco defending its practices as well as its IPRs. I have seen nothing that suggests Wi-LAN's patents are in doubt. The question is, does Cisco have patents that invalidate Wi-LAN's claims? The subtext in such a case would be, is Cisco using the patent process improperly to gain an unfair advantage? The quoted language you excerpted does sound vague. I wonder how clear and explicit the Cisco/Clarity language is? More to the point, will vague language invalidate Wi-LAN's claim? You make the point that this matter won't be solved in the public forum. None of us thought it would. But as investors, we have to make judgements and inferences based on incomplete information. I think it's safe to say that most of us here, while aware of the dangers, are also aware of the nature of the adversaries: one dominant and ruthless, the other young and innovative. " Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated." The Cisco refrain. I think many tire of it. Best wishes, Jim

To: wonk who wrote (1316)	12/1/1999 5:20:00 AM
From: Hatim Zaghloul	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16863

Good day everyone, Thanks for all the insights, good thoughts and good wishes. The reply Wireless Wonk is referring to, as I explained before, was an attempt to give a brief explanation on a chat group. Note that in my reply, I used the term "including." I was not and am not planning to get into a patent debate on a chat group. There is no gain for Wi-LAN or its shareholders in such a debate. Thanks again for your continued support, Hatim

To: wonk who wrote (1316)	12/1/1999 7:05:00 AM
From: Rehan Mahmud	Respond to of 16863

As George Gilder often says battles are not won by the patent portfolio but by competitive performance. I think WiLan has already reaped several advantages by holding its patents. Reasonable companies are licensing it (because the stuff seems to work well). It has given WIN priceless exposure. There may even be an alliance formed as a result of the 'alleged' patent molestation by Cisco. Importantly, the question is on Cisco's patents and not on WiLan's. If you were LU, who would you license your technology from? In my mind, it is how the technology performs and how WIN executes is whats going to determine the fortunes of WIN.

To: wonk who wrote (1316)	12/2/1999 11:14:00 AM
From: P2V	Respond to of 16863

Thanks W_W , I appreciate your "caution" and comments. In my view, your posts (on this and the Last Mile thread) exhibit an honest effort to review and present an impartial evaluation of the various OFDM flavors. On OFDM itself -- actually we can look back to 1942, the year that I first attended school, for the origins of this technology -- wi-lan.com Wi-Lan's W-OFDM and and Multicode DSS patents may be viewed at these links --- patents.ibm.com patents.ibm.com My post was sloppy at best, but I was trying to convey my lack of concern about Cisco's view of Wi-Lan's patents. I believe that Philips and Telia (& possibly Tele2 UK), have already validated Wi-Lan's patented technology, and nothing (that Cisco does) can change that fact. I still remain very skeptical of Cisco's attempt to defeat the forces of nature by spanning large buildings and other objects, with their Smart Vector stuff ! At one time, I was called upon to service ground based (VHF & UHF) Air Navigational Aid Systems , which operated & failed in a truly distinct 4 season environment . These activities included -- chipping ice from antenna structures, scraping blown wet snow from antenna radomes, and shoveling this same "stuff" from antenna counterpoises. When V-OFDM proves to be useable in a totally distinct 4 season environment --I'll believe in it. I think that Hatim was addressing his doubt that - Discrete Multi-Tone technology (which was designed to operate in a hostile but relatively stable, copper wire environment) is truly a wide band technology. I view his comments as an attempt to explain in semi-layman's terms, just what Wideband means, and nothing more. It looks like you agree that Wi-Lan's patent is (at least one basis) for future 802.11x products. I hope that I will be around long enough to view and enjoy the fruits of those products. Hope to see more of your outstanding posts. Best regards, Mardy.