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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (9142)	3/28/2001 8:25:13 AM
From: Mika Kukkanen	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 196856

David: The reason why the royalty rate is always on the GSM agenda is due to the time honoured tradition of cross licensing. The GSM IPR (I believe an American company claims to own the most - Motorola?) was cross licensed between the main suppliers, therefore IPR costs on equipment to any buyer was virtually nil. However, the problem would be for a new supplier in the market with no IPR - in which case they would have to pay the combined royalty. Hence the need to be involved in the development of any 'standard' from the outset. The number IPR claims for WCDMA is incredibly high - I believe it to be one of the highest ever in any standardisation drive than ever before. As Qualcomm no longer manufacture infrastructure or handsets, they have no need to cross-license and therefore a 5% royalty is slapped on top of any cost to the buyer. Thsi can then be interpreted that with Qualcomm's involvement, everything is now 5% more expensive.