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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gus who wrote (3914)	2/14/2000 11:10:00 AM
From: Quincy	Respond to of 5195

Gus, are we to assume IDC's foundation patents are at risk of expiring as well? Message 10903791 Manufacturers always want to use the latest ASICS because their competitors are about to do the same. Why risk being locked out because you don't have licenses for the latest patents? Is it reasonable to observe that a license for CDMAOne would encompass an increasing number of patents over time? Any change in the license contract, especially for changes in royalty terms, would require new negotiations and possibly a new up-front payment not overlooking the legal bills incurred by all parties. Would they be able to keep their original terms? Why is this a feature?

To: Gus who wrote (3914)	2/14/2000 11:39:00 AM
From: Quincy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5195

Gee, Gus. If it weren't for your angry retorts to Bux, we wouldn't have realized the difference between claiming IPR on all five modes of IMT2000 and actually collecting royalties on CDMA systems with bandwidths under 10mhz. Message 12856066 What is unquestionable and easily verifiable is that QCOM paid $5.5 million to IDC for IS-95 usage under 10Mhz ONLY. " Ok, if it is easily verifiable like you claim, prove it. I don't question the 10Mhz part, I question your claim that they are limited to IS95. What about Globalstar, Omnitracks, HDR, 1XRTT and 3XRTT? Will providers ever use channels wider than 10Mhz? I think your goal is to help us think positive of buying IDC shares. But, about the "cross license" of 1994, you need to help me find tangible advantages IDC has received as a result. It hasn't resulted in significant royalty income. It hasn't earned them access to other Q patents which could make BCDMA more appealing to providers. They haven't visibly licensed those five patents to others (except for terms like buying non-Q asics. Who on earth would do that?) I personally believe your desire to pick on semantics is rendered moot until it shows up on the balance sheet. Now that IDC claims IPR on CDMA2000, tell me how they intend to add it to their royalty stream. It isn't coming from Neopoint. Qualcomm already has 3G licenses signed with Lucent, Phillips, and VLSI. Are you hoping they will join an IMT 3G patent pool? Message 12859416 I liked your first paragraph. Your personal attacks on Bux and Mr. Molloy help us find land mines for IDC investors in the article you respond to.

To: Gus who wrote (3914)	2/14/2000 11:44:00 AM
From: Bux	Respond to of 5195

Hear no evil, see no evil. Put on the blinders and the earplugs, were gonna ride this one all the way. Don't want to know if that's up or down, but no guts, no glory. Is it me or is Bux starting to get a wee bit scary! Ready, set....IGNORE! Gus, I'm glad you have finally admitted you don't want to discuss the issues that give us insight into IDC's future. You have exposed yourself as the shallow booster that you are. You have made all kinds of baseless accusations and then refused to follow-up on the rebuttals with anything more substantial than name-calling. Good luck! Bux