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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: HG who wrote (57584)	12/29/1999 2:05:00 PM
From: 16yearcycle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

My opinion is that I want to only own Q and Nok in this area. G

To: HG who wrote (57584)	12/29/1999 2:06:00 PM
From: pheilman_	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

The consensus is that IDC is a litigious gnat from NJ. Having walked up the stairs at Q headquarters past the walls of patents, I find it extremely unlikely that IDC has a meaningful patent position to threaten Q. Viterbi deserves much more respect for his technical contributions, every modern digital communication system uses his technique for error correction. Convolutional encoders and "Viterbi" decoders are in every satellite system, every digital settop box, every high-speed modem, ... Now, who are the world-striding geniuses of communication at IDC? Or, how much money are they pouring into R&D? Patents are relatively cheap and easy to obtain. Important, fundamental patents are much rarer. The power control patent that Q has is fundamental. It is impossible to make a CDMA system work (efficiently) without close power control. Sorry for the rant, I am just concerned that people will think that a good way to get on the CDMA train is to buy IDC. Paul