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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Lurgio who wrote (1173)	12/4/1999 9:25:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

Nokia will bring out GSM/CDMA dual mode devices. Q! will buy the rights to make GSM and put it in the ASICs they make. Maybe the two will get together by Q! selling Nokia the handset division and getting GSM rights for ASICs. No, I have't followed Ericky versus Interdigital. Interdigital is an admirable company with heaps of excellent lawyers who do a good job of ensuring they get money from other companies. It would not pay to find anything detrimental about Interdigital because they might sue anyone saying anything that isn't totally admiring of their brilliance in creating CDMA for the world. They have even taken part in something to do with setting 3G CDMA standards so everyone will want to pay them a fortune for their intellectual property so that WWeb can spread around the world. Nokia might also be interested in Interdigital WLL IP. I have no idea. Also, on the IPR front, the world seems to be divided up into scroungers, bludgers and the good guys. Qualcomm seems to have consistently been on the right side of legal disputes. It would be worth it to Nokia to create some FUD by supporting the idea that Interdigital and they have a way around Qualcomm technology. $70m is nothing if they can delay Qualcomm's technology by a month. Nokia is raking in many billions. When the GSM music stops, so does their big cashflow unless they can get CDMA singing. Who knows, they might even strike it lucky and get around the Q! patents or get an OJ judge or jury. It's all too tricky for me but I do know from the long, cynical, Ericy denigration of CDMA that motives are not always pure and genuine and fully nice, despite the glowering presence of the great JJJ Klan* protective collective ensuring no untoward shenanigans go on which might perpetuate monopolies, leverage them, or charge consumers money for goods and services. So Interdigital has been granted some patents. That's a long way from implementation. Those patents might be challenged too. They might be a bit like W-CDMA. Allegedly different from cdma2000 and invented by NTT and Ericky, but the reality is gradually sliding into the clonezone. 'The market' believing something is just a fashionable collective. It's just a voting system. While many people are thrilled by democracy and believe everyone should submit their will to whatever ridiculous ideas some ephemeral majority cobbles together, it doesn't make that majority right. Markets and voters are suckers. The fact that Interdigital stock has been voted up, doesn't make it right that it is more valuable. Mqurice *JJJ = Joel, Janet, Jackson three musketeers. Investors should study these companies carefully because it is easy to believe things and lose money. Investors should investigate all claims and not assume noble intent. These comments are my opinion and if any imply facts, then readers should investigate things for themselves and judge accordingly. My previous disclaimer applies and is available in SI for review. Each is responsible for their own analysis of the situation and these comments are opinion only, derived from published sources in Silicon Investor and elsewhere. No negative implications should be derived in regard to any person or company, group of lawyers whether criminal or commercial, technology, products, ideas, patents or other virtual or real property. Nor should this disclaimer be taken as suggestion that some people are absurdly litigious and I hereby point out that each person should form their own judgements about their investments, though that should not be taken as investment advice as some people would be better NOT to form their own judgements about their investments and should use the chimpanzee stock selection method described in this thread.

To: Jim Lurgio who wrote (1173)	12/7/1999 1:53:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12231

Jim - I'll say it again - not all IPR is created equal. At this point in time, without Qualcomm's patent on power control in a cell system, CDMA doesn't work in a mobile cell system. Period. That is not true of, for instance, 538. First, 538 is a compendium of different, virtually unrelated, items. The only thing they all have in common is that they mention CDMA. And of the three disparate things in the patent, two are worthless. I practically guarantee it. On a scale with the GTE patent at 0 and the Qualcomm Power Control patent at 10, the two items are at 1 with an uncertainty of 1. (The two items are: 1-general discussion of the merits and trades involved in different methods of power control, 2-a completely obvious multiple banks approach to a multipath correlator) The third item has to do with varying the bandwidth of a transmitted signal. It is certainly something I have never seen before nor would I have thought of it (although that doesn't necessarily make it original) and thus rates higher on the originality scale. However, I have doubts about its utility, so at best I give it 4 with uncertainty of 3. Clark PS My scale of 0 to 10 covers a lot of facets. To be a 10 a patent must not only be very likely to be found valid in court (i.e. original and non-obvious in an adversarial trial), it must also be useful in the real world. If it fails completely on any of these counts it is a zero even if everything else is perfect. PPS Note that humorously the second most referenced patent author in 538 is Gillhousen(sp?). Guess where he works?