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: Stock Farmer who wrote (75631)	3/20/2008 2:44:46 PM
From: ihavenoidea	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197254

what impact, if any,do you see the 6% royalty awarded to brcm against qualcomm for a non-essential patent in the q/nok battle?i

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (75631)	3/20/2008 2:46:21 PM
From: blimfark	Respond to of 197254

Farmer, thank you for your analysis. Do you have an opinion as to what Qualcomm's motivation for not computing a patent-by-patent price for it's IPR that is viewed to be essential by ETSI might be? The only reasons that I could speculate would be that they either don't agree with the ETSI designations, generally or specifically, or they don't like the answer that they get when they do the math.

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (75631)	3/20/2008 3:34:01 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 197254

Stock, thanks for your very cogent analysis. You should not have been lurking for so long. Your excellent contributions have immeasurably increased the board's fund of knowledge. This is what a Nokia IPR guy had to say about the ETSI IPR policy when its amendment was being discussed: wipo.int He suggests that "Aggregated Reasonable Terms" and "Proportionality" ought to be the benchmarks for the new FRAND policy, which has alredy been enacted. It doesn't appear that NOK won that argument. Nonetheless, it is hard to think of how Aggregated Reasonable Terms would work without bundling.