To: Stock Farmer who wrote (75877 ) 3/27/2008 11:57:39 AM From: Qgent Read Replies (1) | Respond to Excuse me for jumping in, but if I could just add a little to this most interesting discussion."Nokia now holds a fully paid up license to technology that was CRITICAL". Patents is paid up only (Redacted) if Nokia exercises one of the options. It did not hold this fully paid up license before. Qualcomm desires to make chipsets that work in GSM, and has no significant GSM IPR. Qualcomm was not interested in this market before. In the 1992 SULA,Nokia did not seek or obtain meaningful value for its own patents - even though it held a significant portfolio of wireless technology patents essential to GSM standard - because at the time Qualcomm was only marketing products compliant with its own CAI/CDMAone system. And of course, both parties have added to their IPR portfolios In other words, assuming the '01 offer was FRAND (which we can assert by the parties hard-bargained agreement),then unless a licensing offer by Qualcomm to Nokia is discounted from the '01 offer by enough to offset the intervening increase in Nokia's market position value (as observed in '01) of Nokia's fully paid up license to IS-95 and other patents, AND the value of Qualcomm's access to the GSM market, which Qualcomm did not then need, then such offer might reasonably be deemed as "not FRAND".
