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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cooters who wrote (79910)	9/11/2000 9:41:09 AM
From: slacker711	Respond to of 152472

Qualcomm working with MP3.com..... dailynews.yahoo.com Monday September 11 09:15 AM EDT MP3.com still hopes for settlement By Ben Charney, ZDNet News CEO Michael Robertson thinks his company can avoid paying a $118 million settlement to Universal Studios. MP3.com CEO Michael Robertson believes he can still settle out of court his legal differences with Universal Studios, which last week edged closer to a landmark piracy ruling against the digital music company. The two sides, Robertson revealed Saturday, are still in negotiations to end the ongoing legal war over whether MP3.com has been a vehicle for pirated music. • The MP3.com Suit • Free PC software tune-ups • Get Free Downloads on ZDNet • Beginner's Guide to MP3 But at the same time, Robertson concedes that Universal is a tougher foe than the four other record companies that originally were part of the copyright lawsuit filed against MP3.com. The other four have settled with MP3.com and, as part of the agreements, reached licensing deals with MP3.com. In just the past two weeks, MP3.com linked up to help market music from Warner Brothers, one of the four plaintiffs that settled with MP3.com. Universal was offered the same settlement package, Robertson said Saturday. But for a reason that mystifies him, the company rejected it. Striking out "We've hit four grand slams," Robertson said following an address to a group of digital music industry executives gathered in Emeryville, Calif. "But we struck out with a fifth." Striking out may be a bit of an understatement. The judge in the case ruled that MP3.com owes $25,000 for every song that Universal claims MP3.com doesn't have the rights to help distribute. Universal has submitted a list of 4,700 songs, which could bring damages to $118 million. Robertson said that in November the company will attack "most of that list" and, if successful, could reduce the potential damages. During the interview, Robertson also said he didn't expect the legal problems when he launched MP3.com several years ago. In fact, he said he thought the recording industry would be eager to work with him. "We thought the industry would be excited about this because it encourages people to buy more CDs," he said. "I'm really disappointed when the industry reacted the way they did." MP3.com in the driver's seat For a man who may have just lost $118 million, Robertson was upbeat about MP3.com's future. The company will be reopening its My.MP3.com service in the next two weeks as a result of the record company settlements, Robertson said. The service lets customers access their music from anywhere in the world. He also is enthusiastic about an experiment being done with Qualcomm Inc. (Nasdaq:QCOM - news) to bring the MP3.com service to cars. The two San Diego companies are working to get over what Robertson calls the "fast mile problem," a play on the term used for delivering broadband from an Internet service provider to a home. Using Qualcomm's high data rate technology, Robertson said the companies tried to access music stored at the My.MP3.com music locker service from a van driving around San Diego. While he didn't say whether it was successful, he said to "watch out for that to come." Robertson also expects to see by Christmas a device in stores, priced at about $200 or so, that will allow MP3.com users to circumvent their home PCs and plug directly into their online music storage lockers.

To: Cooters who wrote (79910)	9/11/2000 9:42:00 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

The information about wireless imaging is really old hat. See some of the SNDK discussions about two months ago. Kodak for quite some time has been looking into wireless transmission of images to a host computer (e.g., AOL, a newspaper office, or perhaps one's own computer). The idea is that you would pay someone to store the image or prepare it for transmission online, or prepare it for printing, and of course Kodak would receive payment for both storage and printing. This appears to be why Kodak has never shown any interest in acquiring ownership in flash memory technology, but instead is looking at online solutions to replace the old camera store or corner drugstore as a place you go to for getting film developed and making prints. It also means that the average photographer with even a high resolution digital camera could get by on a lower cost flash card of about 8 to 16 mb capacity, instead of the more versatile 64-96 mb chips now available. I use a 96 mb CF card with my Nikon 950 and see the Kodak solution as only an expensive inconvenience. Sending photo images by wireless ought to be a godsend for professional photographers, particularly in sports/news photography, where you need to get that image back to the home office to meet a deadline. But I don't see it as a major trend for the average photographer.