To: H. Bradley Toland, Jr. who wrote (61163 ) 3/19/2007 10:16:53 PM From: Eric L Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 197007 Eric's Point ... Bradley, << Eric's point seems to be that the right to use early patents may be all they need. >> That was not intended to be my point and it is not my point. Nokia needs Qualcomm's and Ericssons, and NECs, and Motorola's, and DoCoMo's and many others "essential" patents to manufacture GSM/GPRS/EDGE/WCDMA/WEDGE/HEDGE mobile devices. Conversely QUALCOMM and Mobile device and infrastructure OEMs and OEMs need Nokia's CDMA/GSM/GPRS/EDGE/WCDMA/WEDGE/HEDGE essential patents to manufacture single-mode or multi-mode chipsets, terminals, or infrastructure. The paid up license simply potentially changes the landscape somewhat relative to QUALCOMM's arguments relative to the fundamental nature of their early patented inventions trumping other essential IPR. << However, when it comes to transmission of data--like HSDPA and HSUPA--I believe QCOM has a very strong patent position and those patents are of course more recent. I believe QCOM has a very strong patent position and those patents are of course more recent. I believe Nokia will need these unless they plan to sell WCDMA 'lite' >> Nokia has no intention of selling only WCDMA 'lite.' QUALCOMM unquestionably has a strong position in HSPA. I think you'll find, however, that Nokia's, Motorola's, Ericsson's, TI's, and InterDigitals, IPR positions in HSPA are also exceptionally strong, and that HSDPA development in 3GPP began over 1½ years before QUALCOMM started making 3G UMTS 3GPP contributions in mid-2001. HSDPA is much more similar to 1XTREME (remember that Moto/Nokia sponsored 3GPP2 technology?) than it is to QUALCOMM's HDR which became HRPD and was standardized as IS-856 1xEV-DO, but like HRPD it is a CDM/TDM hybrid. - Eric -