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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 49thMIMOMander who wrote (13133)	6/27/2001 7:00:45 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

All decided by some patent court somewhere?? I hear the subtext of your message to mean that CDMA should not have been patented. Anywhere. And that Q is some sort of self-aggrandizing interloper who deserves nothing for what it has done. I'll also assume that your stance is one purely motivated by intellectual honesty. Not influenced at all by national pride and the fact that Nokia's UMTS plans are utterly and absolutely dependent on obtaining a Q license. OK, I believe you. Sure I do. Let see, there are a few Courts that have disagreed with your stance. Ericsson got involved in litigation with the Q and voluntarily gave its claim up. The other biggie, Motorola, gave it up, too. Can't count the number of licensees who have signed up to use Q's CDMA patents. Without engaging in a debate based on principle because I simply don't know enough about patent law, I'd say that your no doubt intellectually honest position is belied by the facts, i.e., every body disagrees with you. No one is presently in litigation trying to establish the correctness of your views. Hell, Nokia says the CDMAOne license it has is good enough for 3G, a weak argument but better than nothing. NoMoGo is actually paying royalties to Q for its little trial 3G network. You were saying something about patents?