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 (5349)	6/8/2000 3:38:00 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 34857

But, Tero, you didn't answer my questions! OK, I'll answer them for you. Ericsson (sounds like a good, sensible Nordic name to me) does in fact charge fees for use of its essential GSM patents! Open standards, Nordic sensibility, let's surf the wave non-parasitically for free, yada, yada, yada,...hogwash! To test your theories, why don't you ask Ericsson to give up its GSM rights? I don't think your derriere will like getting thrown out into frozen Swedish sidewalks. If anyone has something good, and it belongs exlusively to them, they'll charge for it. Why do you blame the Q for doing what is routine in the commercial world, i.e., charge a fee for innovations? No charities in the telecom biz, I'm afraid. Regards, A mind-controlled cabalist

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (5349)	6/8/2000 3:56:00 PM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 34857

Forbes.com EU Plans To Tax U.S. Internet Firms By Matthew Richards The European Union yesterday proposed tax reforms designed to raid the pockets of U.S. high-tech companies that sell products on the Internet. EU Commissioner Frits Bolkestein may hope to ``create a level playing field'' by taxing U.S. sales in Europe, but the tax discourages e-commerce in Europe, and essentially encourages a less efficient way of doing business--a trŠs European modus operandi. Europeans already have to pay Value Added Tax (VAT), a sales tax of 15% to 25%, on non-physical goods sold by European firms. Brussels bureaucrats claim this gives foreign firms an unfair advantage. Unlike the United States, which has declared a moratorium on Internet taxes until Fall 2001, the European Union is determined to squeeze as much tax revenue out of the Web as possible. The proposals to impose VAT on software, data and other non-physical goods are a blow to companies such as Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT - news), Dow Jones (NYSE: DJ - news) and Qualcomm (Nasdaq: QCOM - news), which sell software or data online. Companies in the U.S. could lose $2 billion in the next five years to European Internet taxes, according to figures from Internet consultancy Jupiter Communications. Some companies have yet to assess exactly what the impact of the tax will be. ``We are reading the law and trying to understand it,'' says RealNetworks' (Nasdaq: RNWK - news) Vice President of Government Affairs Alex Alban. RealNetworks, which sells downloadable music and video software like RealPlayer online, booked 12% of its $131 million 1999 revenue in Europe. Closing the tax loophole will inevitably put upward pressure on prices. Online software retailer Beyond.com (Nasdaq: BYND - news) will raise prices to meet new tax demand, the company's chief financial officer and interim CEO Rick Neely said yesterday. ``Europeans will inevitably try and extend tax into all areas. Our consumers are going to pay the price,'' he said. He described the latest tax measure as one of many ``hurdles in front of new companies using new technology'' in Europe. The good news is that the new tax demands are ``very difficult to enforce,'' according to Etienne Wong, a tax partner at international law firm Clifford Chance. But he adds that the major players will not want to be seen as avoiding taxes on the Internet: ``Large, respectable companies will comply with the new tax demands.'' In opposition, the U.S. has endeavored to keep the Internet a tax-free shopping zone and will most likely object to the new tax demands. ``There is concern in the market that this will lead to a massive trade war on the Internet,'' Wong adds. Commentators have reacted negatively to the tax proposals. ``This is good old-fashioned big-government interference,'' says Nick Jones, an analyst at Jupiter Communications. Jones adds that the tax plans are at odds with European officials' frequent declarations that the continent must embrace e-commerce wholeheartedly. Go to www.forbes.com to see all of our latest stories.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (5349)	6/8/2000 7:56:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Respond to of 34857

Tero - The whole point of GPRS was that the open standard approach works. Sure - but that doesn't make it not a tactic like any other. Other, very important, companies have used other tactics and been very successful. Which tactic you use is dependent on what your strengths are. A manufacturing house, relatively weak in technology, would obviously favor an open standard. A technology house has a different perspective. An entrenched monopoly has yet another persepctive. The key is picking the right tactic for the right company. Microsoft, as an entrenched monopoly, uses the include (a standard), enfold (control the standard), destroy (make it non-standard) method which works well for them. BTW - You must be kidding if you think that the GPRS backers didn't think about why open was better. And high on the list was probably that an open standard will attract more manufacturers (which are no threat to the backers) and buzz than a closed standard but without threatening their base (i.e. manufacturing). Clark

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (5349)	6/9/2000 12:24:00 AM
From: brian h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Tero, I guess that "See ""some companies"" in court." may become a reality sooner rather than later if "some companies" insisted on spinning their way into their "WCDMA" marketing term. How about an increase in royalty rate for a delay in signing a license? Brian H.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (5349)	6/9/2000 2:58:00 AM
From: NAGINDAS J.O.PATTNI	Respond to of 34857

TERO,i do agree 101%,in european terms qcom it's a corp. with a turnover of 5b$,an insignificant one ,a market niche operator,with a funny tech.which risk to be obsolete before beeing implemented,they misappropriate is95 from idcc,they settled in court,but idcc went way forward and it's working with NOK now. nagin