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: William Hunt who wrote (86950)	11/10/2000 12:56:07 PM
From: Cooters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Qualcomm Patents Upheld in Europe After Challenge From Nokia --From AOL. Check out the wording on this one. LOL!-- Cooters San Diego, Nov. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Qualcomm Inc. said European officials upheld three of its patents, including one challenged by Nokia Oyj that's critical to its wireless phone standard used by 65 million people. Qualcomm shares rose $2.94, or 4 percent, to $75.63 in early afternoon trading. Nokia, the world's largest cellular phone maker, has been fighting the patent, essential to Qualcomm's so- called CDMA technology, since July, 1998. Nokia's American depositary receipts fell $3.06 to $38.38. The decisions could make it easier for Qualcomm to get royalties from license agreements in Europe, now dominated by a competing cellular standard. Nokia remains a holdout in licensing Qualcomm's patents for new phones and equipment that provide faster wireless Internet access. Qualcomm, based in San Diego, successfully defended other patents in Europe, Japan and the U.S. this year and last. The company also makes computer chips for wireless phones and gets royalties based on its code division multiple access technology, used by 11 percent of the world's cell-phone subscribers. Nov/10/2000 12:45 ET

To: William Hunt who wrote (86950)	11/10/2000 1:00:00 PM
From: sam	Respond to of 152472

OFF TOPIC "If it is a problem in Palm Beach county why is it not a problem in Ohio?" Because its arguably against the law in Florida...and perhaps not in Ohio (just guessing about Ohio). I'm hoping the result of all this is simply that election officials become mindful of the statutes that should be guiding them. And that they learn to dot the i's and cross the t's...so that problems like this never happen again. Perhaps Pres. Bush will make that one of his first pet projects. ;)