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: The Verve who wrote (12855)	6/22/2000 1:43:00 AM
From: Valueman	Respond to of 13582

I have never heard it mentioned in regards to the ERICY agreement that Q pays ERICY for W-CDMA IPR. Never. Would this not have been a stipulation? Very smart folks have told me that Q actually picked up most of what they need in that ERICY deal(remember, ERICY invented W-CDMA, CDMA and Hedi Lamar). We'll see, but Q still has the upper hand.

To: The Verve who wrote (12855)	6/22/2000 1:49:00 AM
From: A.L. Reagan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

there is still some haze about NET flows to Q in a WCDMA versus CDMA 2000 scenario. If the "bottom line impact" (I'll try that versus the confusing "net royalties" lingo) were the same, there would be no 3G holy wars, no blood sports, no FUD, no interoperability issues... and probably no such thing as WCDMA! We'd all be living in a perfect world, with no political trade barriers, universal free markets, totally level playing fields, and the only factor to handicap was technology. If only it were so. P.S. Verve, I hope we don't wear poor Nancy out. <g>