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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (144528)	8/25/2006 11:47:12 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

<I'm never going to believe that Qualcomm didnt know what was going into the various standards so really it comes down to a question of what their obligations were.> How is it in QCOM's interests to fail to disclose their patents which were being used to convert olde-style GSM to new-style GPRS? It seems to me to be a total lose situation if they didn't disclose. It's not as though they could ambush and make a fortune by getting their technology included inadvertently then profiting from the inclusion as might be the case for companies without other things to go on with. QCOM had CDMA technology and multimode technology which were their bread and butter. QCOM specifically did NOT want standalone GSM and GPRS and EDGE to see the light of day, let alone burgeon like a rampant cancer, especially through the improvement offered by QCOM technology. QCOM is trying to sell CDMA technology, NOT GSM technology, which they include only because they need multimode technology to enable GSM consumers to gradually make the change. It is simply absurd to think that QCOM deliberately allowed GSM/GPRS/EDGE to sneakily use QCOM technology which resulted in a crushing of QCOM's business. QCOM's CDMA would have replaced GSM long ago were it not for the impressive gains made by GSM technology, which I had previously thought was just brilliance on the part of the GSM makers and had even [I can hardly believe it] congratulated them on such success. I would NOT have been impressed if I'd known they did it by theft. QCOM has been trying to get Nokia to pay up and presumably to pay up for use in GSM/GPRS/EDGE standalone systems too, but Nokia has obviously spat the dummy and is wanting their own way, which means use of QCOM property without paying the price QCOM chooses to charge for their property. Why do you think it serves QCOM's interests to have failed to disclose and to allow Nokia to enjoy vast GSM/GPRS/EDGE sales based on unpaid QCOM technology by such omission? I don't understand that. My guess is that they failed to disclose because of blunder - there must be quite a paper circus going on with thousands of patents, who has disclosed what, paid what, negotiated what, who is using what, where and when and somebody attending a standards meeting couldn't possibly be up with everything. Maybe they didn't disclose something which everyone was talking about in the meeting - one would think if everyone is talking about something, it would be somewhat redundant to "disclose" it. Or maybe they weren't all talking about it, but there must have been some discussion if it was so critical. I can easily understand that QCOM mistakenly didn't "disclose" something which was obviously in their interests to "disclose" in some procedural manner other than just having people know about it. Mqurice