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: D.J.Smyth who wrote (3999)	2/17/2000 11:53:00 AM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5195

Darrell, the only support you offer for IDC in this post is the following: when you have the leader of the ITU IMT2000 consortium personally visiting little IDC in King of Prussia; i guarantee he isn't making this house call to simply say hi. Agreed. But are you implying he is visiting because IDC holds key IPR? I think that is faulty reasoning. Perhaps he is visiting because IDC is claiming so much IPR and is threatening the entire process. You see, the standards groups don't have the authority or inclination to decide who has what but they can certainly make recommendations and lobby the companies who are threatening the successful and rapid creation of a standard. And in case you forgot, simply declaring IPR in the standard proposal is enough to derail the whole standard if the other other members disagree on the IPR. The highly hyped "royalty pooling" process is a flawed model. The old-fashioned way works. in your thinking you've labed Bill's site potentially guilty of "boosterism" (whatever that is). what then, is the opposite of boosterism? the yahoo message board? shouldn't the yahoo message board be shut down due to the total load of ... there? what is your definition of free expression? I am all for "free-expression", that's what Bill's site is. The problem is it is billed as an investors resource, not "Welcome to Bill's world of Free Expression". I would call it an informational site if the information was presented in a balanced perspective, without resorting to the type of word trickery that you claim removes your legal liability in the event that IDC turns out to have very little value. The opposite of "boosterism" would be the same sort of distortion of facts and using tricky wording and selective presentation, only used to the opposite end. I am not doing this. I am trying to offer investors a balanced perspective by challenging some of the misleading representations that are presented here. Granted, I am only providing half of the story, the other half (and more) has already been presented by IDC boosters. I don't have an "IDC informational" website so correcting the mistakes I see presented here is enough to help achieve a more balanced perspective. Sincerely, Bux