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: foundation who wrote (22372)	5/8/2002 7:14:31 PM
From: Ramsey Su	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 197001

www-edocs.unimaas.nl I can hear Jorma mumbling. "Why can't we just repeat what we did with GSM? (see above link) Afterall, Nokia is contributing the most important essential elements of any technology - color face plates!" Nokia's proposal is such an act of desperation that it is almost silly. How could this possibly work? I suppose if a select group agree to set up some artificial barrier for all future entries, in exchange for this assured 5%, then the monopolistic benefits to the group could justify this compromise? Wait. Isn't that the GSM cabal? What if Nokia miraculously invented a technique that can cut the cost of anything-WCDMA in half, would they share the technology for a portion of this 5%? The fact that Nokia, knowing full well what they have to pay QCOM, proposes something like this is a plain admission that they have nothing whatsoever to offer. I hope the carriers are not holding their breath, waiting for the deliviery of the wcdma networks this year. The tragedy being that the solution is so simple for Nokia. Do a tech JV with QCOM and they will immediately be assured the lead role in wireless for decades to come. .... but those egos .... Ramsey

To: foundation who wrote (22372)	5/8/2002 8:42:32 PM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197001

Nokey is correctly concerned that conditions could evolve where the ownership and associated costs of the UMTS standard could be tied up in the courts in perpetuity. And carriers won't buy equipment under those conditions. Don't be so sure! This was always one of the fundamental arguements I had with Gregg Powers views. Gregg always made statements that Qualcomm could prevent the commercialization of WCDMA if the manufactures did not recognize and pay for QCOM's IPR. And Qualcomm could tie up the commercial roll out in courts for years! While at the same time he claimed that even if Ericsson won it's infringement case in Texas against Qualcomm. Qualcomm could simply appeal and continue to sell equipment without fear of an injunction against Qualcomm from selling it's technology. Now, this never made any sense to me! It seemed like too much of a "one way street". Thankfully, we never had to find out how this would have played out if Ericsson won. Now we move on to the Great WCDMA delay game! Hard to believe that WCDMA was going to be ready for deployment back in 1999 according to the Nords. Now, we go fast-forward 3 years later and it still appears "still born" 3 years is a long time as far as technology goes. And NOK has been busy pumping out WCDMA patents. The just got a WCDMA closed loop power control patent a couple of weeks ago.. As I have wrote several times. The entire WCDMA patent pool dilution scheme is strangely similar to what happened to Motorola's TDMA patent position. About 10 years ago. The Euros injected just enough of non-Motorola TDMA IPR into GSM causing MOT to lose their strength in their patent holdings. Seems very similar to what is happening now. Probably years of litigation and arbitration ahead! IMO, PCSTEL