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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D.J.Smyth who wrote (8632)	4/13/2000 11:30:00 AM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

Mr. Smith, take a look at your statements: The 94' agreement clearly DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE TRANSFER OF IDC'S TECHNOLOGY TO THE THIRD GENERATION. HOW COULD IT, THE THIRD GENERATION PLATFORM WAS NON-EXISTENT in 1994? Let's be logical. Clearly the '94 agreement purports to transfer some IPR for Qualcomm's use. There are limitations on this transfer but since 3G didn't exist (and still doesn't) there was no blanket prohibition on the transferred technology being used in 3G. If the agreement allows even one patent to be used in any 3G system, then the agreement provides for the transfer of that IPR to 3G. It's as simple as that. Even the recent IDC 10K says it allows the transfer to 3G with some limitations. Therefore your statement is misleading, just admit it or go away. Further, it is probably a moot point since Qualcomm has always maintained the agreement was made to put an end to the legal expenses, not because they felt they needed IDC's IPR. The fact that the $5.5 million dollar payment from QCOM to IDC was less than their legal expenses supports that that claim. Bux