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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (836)	8/6/1998 10:54:00 AM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Tero, Any IPR issue over W-CDMA could well be a long haul. If I may let me use Interdigitals 7 year IPR issue in the German courts. Under the protest of Siemens/Alcatel/Philips IDC requested and was granted a TDMA patent . The parties then took it to court to have the patent invalidated . Before the first decision of the court validating the patent Siemens withdrew from the case and became a consortium partner with IDC to develop B-CDMA. The case went on and this March Alcatel joined the consortium of IDC/Siemens/Samsung to develop B-CDMA. Eighteen days later Alcatel and Philips withdrew from the suit stating they no longer use the patent . To date IDC hasn't received a dime regarding that TDMA patent but now they have Alcatel for a partner. My point is what did the 7 year dispute produce now that the patent is valid ? If it's valid then all of the countries that belong to the EPO should have to pay IDC if they have used that patent in their products but there has been no revenues from Europe regarding that patent. ERICY too is testing that patent in the USA courts and that is going on for what seems like eons. The amazing thing is that since that German court decision Kyocera/Sharp and Toshiba have licensed with IDC and paid 48 million. You and Gregg both make strong points regarding the issue but most probably it will go to court. Samsung is building a trial B-CDMA system in Chonqging China and it was asked in the QCOM forum if IDC would have to use Qcom's IPR to build that system. Gregg responded and said Qcom's counsel believed that IDC and Samsung both may have to pay Qcom. In a sec filing by IDC in the results of the Qcom vs IDC patent issue over CDMA they stated that they believed Qcom's ipr would not have to be used to build a B-CDMA system. Well it looks like there may be another court case once the system in Chonqging is built but IDC has much stronger partners . From what I'm told W-CDMA and B-CDMA are very similar systems except currently B-CDMA is not mobile. Who knows that might even be another court case ? Have a nice day. Jim

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (836)	8/6/1998 11:22:00 AM
From: marginmike	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

Then where are the patents from 7 years ago? Why would Erickson deny CDMA's attributes. If Nokia had CDMA 7 years ago, why did they buy a liscence? Im sorry, You are defending thieves and liers. It removes any credibility you would have. I am a Nokia shareholder also, and dont feel Qcom and Nokia's success cant be mutual.The bottom line is W-CDMA is a joke. It is CDMA with standards changed to differentiate it. In the end Erickson may win, but you cant prostitute the truth! Qualcom developed CDMA against all types of pressure, and lies, and noise, by people much like yourself. The fact is now the piper must be paid. The Europeans will not be allowed to make up the rules as they did with GSM. The question you might ask yourself is who has more downside risk? Qualcoms stock price has been discounted for all this noise, and short positions, ang European analysts downgrades. However Nokia and Erickson do not have downside in their stock. What if Q beets Erickson in court? What happens if Q's CDMA is victorious and Erickson and Nokia have to play catch up? That is not priced into Nokia's lofty stock price.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (836)	8/6/1998 10:32:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 34857

Tero, surreal is the word. L M Ericsson owns almost no CDMA technology, yet you say they are becoming the world's leading third generation CDMA company. They own no technology which can stop Qualcomm's cdma2000 licensed products. They own no technology to build a system themselves. More surreal comment. You say nobody knew what W-CDMA meant in the summer of 1997. Go back to about March, or earlier and you will see me raving about B-CDMA, W-CDMA etc. My comments were accurate then and remain accurate - go and check. I called it vaporware back then and it remains vapourwear now. The Ericsson King is wearing no clothes but the crowd is drooling over their beauty. Talk about surreal. To use language, we need to agree on definitions. I've explained my vapourwear definition. L M Ericsson's 3G-W-CDMA-VW-SETI effort fits the bill. For those who don't know, SETI is the 'search for extra-terrestrial intelligence' project, looking for intelligence elsewhere in the universe. The ETSI Europeans are searching for the same, but rather than make it themselves, they are preparing to steal it from Qualcomm Inc. Talk about surreal! Perhaps you could bother to give us your definition of vaporware Tero if you think that 3G-W-CDMA-VW-SETI doesn't fit the bill. Maurice