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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (3735)	3/3/2000 11:17:00 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

The interesting question is: can Qualcomm bypass the IPR of Ericsson and Nokia in W-CDMA? If it can't, it will have to agree to license-swapping. License swapping happens to be the reason why the IPR revenue for GSM equipment is plus minus zero for major telecom manufacturers. Damn....I agreed with your entire post up until I got to the last paragraph. Ericsson has already got a W-CDMA license....and I dont think they managed to get a "plus minus zero" deal. Unless Nokia has blocking IPR for CDMA2000....I dont think that Nokia will be the one in control. Anyway back to the phones. Is the 7110 going to be priced at around $200? That would be an amazing deal....but I thought they still hadnt cleared up their capacity issues. Any news on a CDMA WAP phone? Slacker

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (3735)	3/3/2000 11:27:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 34857

Tero: Not that it matters much in the real world, since Nokia is busily digging its own grave, but access to CDMA would seem just slightly relevant. Wish you and Nokia well. Chaz

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (3735)	3/3/2000 1:43:00 PM
From: Kayaker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

It's distorted to look at Qualcomm's position by just asking whether other manufacturers can bypass Qualcomm's IPR. The interesting question is: can Qualcomm bypass the IPR of Ericsson and Nokia in W-CDMA? If it can't, it will have to agree to license-swapping. If nok, ericy, and qcom all have IPRs for W-CDMA then it's peachy for nok and ericy, but no so great for any other manufacturer. Why pay royalties to nok, ericy, and qcom for W-CDMA when you can go with CDMA2000 and only pay royalties to qcom. And aren't there others claiming IPRs for W-CDMA? Won't it be years of squabbling and court cases before it settles out? Where are the W-CDMA chipsets that match the CDMA2000 and HDR chipsets from qcom? It sounds like you're hoping for a repeat of the GSM "patent pool" arrangement. Q has been very clear that they won't participate in such an arrangement and I quote "We've had no interest in joining that patent pool and we'll continue with our existing bilateral license negotiations."

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (3735)	3/6/2000 1:40:00 AM
From: Gus	Respond to of 34857

If it can't, it will have to agree to license-swapping. License swapping happens to be the reason why the IPR revenue for GSM equipment is plus minus zero for major telecom manufacturers. That of course excludes the ongoing Ericsson vs IDC lawsuit regarding TDMA. License-swapping is certainly one real possibility but much of the seminal work on spread spectrum has been done here on this side of the pond. The Nokia co-development deal with IDC, for example, involves core broadband CDMA patents with a paper trail that goes all the way back to 1960. I'm beginning to think that the cost of going from 2G TDMA/GSM to 2.5G GPRS or EDGE to 3G WCDMA is so prohibitive and beyond the reach of except a handful of supercarriers that 3G WCDMA may eventually morph into a 4G-ish fixed and mobile wireless WCDMA setup that allows more true broadband services to be layered over the infrastructure. See Golden Bridge/ATT to get a glimpse into the blue sky view of ATT Wireless. A lot can happen in technology in a few years but it is fair to say that wireless voice, not wireless data, is going to be driving mobile wireless demand for a long time. gbtwireless.com