SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: postyle who wrote (4708)7/7/2001 5:39:28 AM
From: Bux  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 5195
 
I don't believe the semantics of 2G or 3G is the issue, neither company would describe the covered technologies with those nebulous terms. And you may be correct that future iterations of CDMA2000 may require a license from IDC but I doubt it. If a license is required I wouldn't expect that IDC would have the necessary leverage to extract substantial royalties. Time will tell but I see no indication you should hold your breath.

IDCC claims they have essential IPR that intersects CDMA2000, and I believe it was said that those patents were not covered by the pact.

As I believe you aware, IDC's claim to essential patents in all 5 modes does not necessarily mean they have not already licensed those patents essential for one or more of those modes for a one time fee. If you have seen an official claim from IDC that this is not the case (for CDMA2000), I would like to see it. Remember, the whole point of the '94 agreement from Q's perspective was to be able to continue their CDMA franchise unimpeded. I would be surprised if they forgot to dot their i's and cross their t's.

As far as looking up old posts, I regularly copy "interesting" posts to a file on my hard drive as I read them for efficient searching at a later date. I don't get all the good ones but enough to get a feel for the evolving scene. I am determined to find out who is at the bottom of this scandal.

Bux