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: JGoren who wrote (13249)	6/26/2000 9:12:00 AM
From: JohnG	Respond to of 13582

JGoren. Yes, you are probably correct about a no resale provision. JohnG

To: JGoren who wrote (13249)	6/26/2000 9:37:00 AM
From: quidditch	Respond to of 13582

JG, John G: I spoke with Q IR on Friday prior to Ibexx's post of the Volpe/Petersen release. What I was told, to no one's surprise by now, was that Telson's license is only for manufacture of subscriber equipment and does not extend to the licensing, manufacture, distribution or sale of CDMA ASICS other than Q's ASICs. Since NOK is not currently in the market with an acceptable ASIC equivalent to the MSM 3100, the Telson/NOK phones will in fact have Q's MSM3100 chip. Since Telson can not sell or distribute CDMA ASICS (other than Q's), NOK would have to rely on its own license for CDMA ASICs in order to distribute into the market or use Q's MSMs; NOK's current license applies only to CDMAOne. JGoren is correct. My pointed question to Q IR was whether the framework of Q's license agreements would somehow permit a licensee of 1xMC, 1x/hdr and 3xMC (e.g., Telson) to JV or co-market with a party not so licensed (e.g., NOK) in order to penetrate new markets under the umbrella of the licensed party. I do not believe Q's license agreements could be so permissive!! Steve