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: AlfaNut who wrote (57670)	12/12/2006 3:51:38 PM
From: JGoren	Respond to of 197200

You're making some excellent points! In one of your past posts, I think you nailed it about NOK's big fear is that Qcom's model of a one-stop shop whereby it is the R&D company for handset makers creating a horizontal industry that dramatically lowers the entry cost for new manufacturers, which is directly at odds with Nokia’s vertically integrated business, which needs barriers to entry. The weird thing is that NOK's anticompetitive-unfair royalty arguments is that they are turning the actual competition on its head. Thanks again for your posts, which I have found to be very thought-provoking.

To: AlfaNut who wrote (57670)	12/12/2006 3:52:55 PM
From: Qpeeper	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197200

It was my understanding that the Q got the majority of its needed GSM IPR via the cross-licensing agreement with TI. Also, now that it is known that Nokia ‘borrowed’ some of Q’s IPR to make GSM more effective, I don’t see how Q cannot be in the driver seat. As far as FRAND goes, approaching 200 or so licensee’s seems to be proof – also the Hagfish signed up for the royalties prior to WCDMA being a standard – thus they knew in advance what the fee was going to be. There are just belly aching- I don’t know if Q can hit them up for triple damages – but if they can will be a large bill.