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: marginmike who wrote (882)	8/17/1998 2:22:00 AM
From: Maurice S. Green	Respond to of 34857

SI MEMBERS---- Please take a moment to reread and edit your notes before posting. I read them over and over trying to understand what you are saying, and end up totally confused and lost. Also trying to cover the entire field in one post -just doesn't work. I know there is language and spelling problems, but a little time spent before posting will save us all --and get your points across so much better. Thanks.

To: marginmike who wrote (882)	8/17/1998 5:40:00 AM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Mike: However Greg Powers has gone on record as saying that he has had Patent attourneys look it over, and they are confident in Qcom. But that isn't what I am saying. What I am saying is that ERICY can get the same coverage as QCOM. The USPTO's, which is the United States Patent and TRademark Office, motto is: "To Help our Customers get Patents" To prove my point, I will look up these two terms when I go to work, Ericssen(or however it is spelled) and CDMA and tell you how many patents I get. Then I will compare it to these terms: Qualcomm and CDMA. Sounds fair? dave