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: JohnG who wrote (82055)	10/3/2000 4:40:01 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 152472

I may be a bit simplistic here. However, I think that NOK has said that it considers the 2G license adequate for 3G. Someone please enlighten me.

To: JohnG who wrote (82055)	10/3/2000 5:14:55 PM
From: jmac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I was unaware of the fact that it was NOK that was making the phones for J-Phone. But, isn't it the end buyer of the phone that pays the royalties. So, J-Phone needs the license and pays the royalty not NOK. No?

To: JohnG who wrote (82055)	10/4/2000 1:48:38 AM
From: engineer	Respond to of 152472

Until NOK delivers and gets paid for a system, they can't be actioned against. On the day they deliver and the day they get paid, I would expect an injunction against them. I know I have published this before and I know this thread has ignored this, but it is quite simple. This is the way patent infringement works. You can't enforce it until someone has made commercial use of it. One can possibly argue that NOK has already made commercial use of it, as they have advertised that they are using WCDMA and their stock price has gone up, but this is harder to enforce and win than it is to seize equipment that uses the patent. As I have said before, if they did do this and Q did get an injunction against them, I find it hard to believe that the carrier would take the risk that their new hot system would be held im limbo in a court for a few years with possible TRIPLE damages, since this is what is awarded if you knowingly infringe. I am sure that Qualcomm has already warned the possible offenders of the infringement risks and this would constitute knowledge. The stakes of this brinksmanship is very high.