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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8558)	9/8/2001 7:22:21 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

As elmat suggested, the Q core patents are the heart and soul of CDMA. There are actually four of them: spread spectrum, power control, soft handoff, and rake receiver. They have been tested worldwide both in court and in administrative offices. The Q has never lost a case. Surely the agreements do not cover patents not yet but soon to be issued, after the signing of the initial deal? I'm unclear about your meaning. I think that once a customer gets a license from Q, it generally gets access to all of its patents. Some distinction as to use, ie, CDMAOne or 3G. Nokia just paid a very hefty, multi-million fee to be able to use Q's patents in 3G, though it had an old license for CDMA One. Because the Q's patent portfolio is so strong in other areas, it can jam this kind of deal down others' throats. Moreover, once the heart and soul patents expire (latest, I think is 2011), it should be able to still jam. Why do you think the Q is so hated in some quarters? It's the tollbooth to 3G. Gotta pay to play. Value of income stream? Who knows. Speculation is that royalties are about 5% of handset sale price so if you can accurately forecast number of 3G sets to be sold in next decade, you can get a more or less figure. It's huge, though, and mostly profit. Create a new 'global/regional' standard anchored by weight of potential customers already aggregated, and start shearing away at QCOM This is what WCDMA was all about. Didn't work in two ways: First, the Q's patents were used, they cannot be avoided for 3G, so sorry. The biggies, Nokia and Ericsson, have capitulated. Second, it created a mess because it doesn't work technologically, either. Read Vodaphone's latest news-UMTSucks. Lots and lots of problems. Not so with QCOM's proprietary 3G standard, CDMA2000. Working nicely in Korea. WCDMA/UMTS was a political game to sidestep Q. Didn't work and, boy, did it hurt development of 3G. Total screwup.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8558)	9/8/2001 7:49:28 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

. Why does QCOM simply quit spending money, stop operating, and turn itself into a publicly traded annuity? Because it has a tremendous R&D shop that is constantly innovating and adding value to the patent portfolio. After all, the heart and soul patents will run out some day. Gotta be able to jam licensing deals down customers' throats somehow. Also, it makes the best ASICs in the business, which are also a source profits.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8558)	9/8/2001 8:57:30 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74559

With respect to Qualcomm and patents, there is only one thing you need to know. There is only one CDMA, and its name is Qualcomm. Thou shalt have no strange profits before it. Yea, though thou walk through the valley of the shadows of other telecoms, thou shalt fear no evil. Qualcomm was there in the beginning, is now, and forever shall be the source of all key patents. Per omnia secula seculorum, amen. Now go thou and sin no more, my child. Load the boat with Qualcomm and thou shalt be saved.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8558)	9/8/2001 9:00:14 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Seriously, I think some of the key patents expire in a year or two, but Qualcomm has licensing deals which give them royalties after the patents expire. The details are sort of vague, as in how much money is paid per license. It's proprietary information. QCOM bulls are very touchy about this question, and you may have opened up a can of worms you will wish you hadn't. Last year some Chinese inventors were claiming they had invented a "flavor" of CDMA that didn't infringe on QCOM's patents. Don't know the status of that. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Duration of a US patent used to be 17 years from the date the patent was granted. In 1995 or thereabouts, it was changed to 20 years from the date of application. There were some "grandfathering" provisions in the interim so you could pick the one that worked best for you. You can access info on granted US patents online at: uspto.gov

To: TobagoJack who wrote (8558)	9/9/2001 3:00:46 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

There are the patents. Right the owners need to make money with. But we have operators that need to make money with the products that use these patents. Result: The technical issues are clouding the views. There are those 130 billion Euro in spent on licenses. This has to be paid back. But it only will be paid back if the products and systems, enabled by the use those patents, help the operators, owners of those licenses, to make money with it. Result: License costs are clouding the views. That leaves elmat here trying to figure out business designs that help the operators make money. Your neighbour Canning Fok is gonna need me, Jay!