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: Rich Bloem who wrote (61216)	3/21/2007 12:43:28 AM
From: waitwatchwander	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196989

At this point in time, it is very important that Qualcomm (and the industry) build a workable cross patenting process with Nokia. Once they are finished here, many others will be lining up to deal with similar cross patenting issues on 3G, 4G, video and only God knows what technology. I do think Qualcomm's patent pool approach makes a lot of sense because it is valued based upon market demand. The problem is many of the parties involved in cross patenting have no interest in playing the game in a similar vein. The other matter complicating this round is the fact that Qualcomm's patent pool is only now moving into an ongoing state of significant turnover. As all Qualcomm licence contracts have a start and end date, those factors shouldn't be all that difficult to handle. Although, first time through anything is always subject to a qualitative quantification process. After Nokia, Samsung and Motorola, with all their WiMAX properties are also going to be challenging. It is interesting to see that Nortel's licence has recently been updated. From Qualcomm's perspective, the significant parts there are most likely related to UMTS, MediaFLO and 802.11 (ie AirGO). I suspect these updates might get the parties into the 2009/2010 timeframe when more serious updates will be required to address Nortel's WiMAX/IMS properties? Everyone would be better served if some sort of market based valuation process was generally accepted and promoted throughout the industry. Whoever "the industry" is? Giving Nokia 2% over Qualcomm's innovations since '99 seems steep to me and would only be a short term gain leading to a long term pain. I might be misinformed but the max I see is 1/2-1% and Nokia should be force to prove that value so that it is readily accepted by all key industry participants. If such is not the case, others are only going to feel ripped off as their turn comes around. It's time for less secrecy in licensing, not more. This is an industry problem. It is sad that the global industry has only become so fragmented that it is now too weak to lead this charge.

To: Rich Bloem who wrote (61216)	3/21/2007 2:13:57 AM
From: Raglanroadie	Respond to of 196989

Why should Q pay 1-2% when NOK has no standard rate? Also, their licensing program has had limited success to date. 1-2% may just well be an example of grossly overpaying for something just because you have the means to do so.